↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
31 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Randomised controlled trial of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a peer-delivered self-management intervention to prevent relapse in crisis resolution team users: study protocol
Published in
BMJ Open, October 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015665
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Crisis resolution teams (CRTs) provide assessment and intensive home treatment in a crisis, aiming to offer an alternative for people who would otherwise require a psychiatric inpatient admission. They are available in most areas in England. Despite some evidence for their clinical and cost-effectiveness, recurrent concerns are expressed regarding discontinuity with other services and lack of focus on preventing future relapse and readmission to acute care. Currently evidence on how to prevent readmissions to acute care is limited. Self-management interventions, involving supporting service users in recognising and managing signs of their own illness and in actively planning their recovery, have some supporting evidence, but have not been tested as a means of preventing readmission to acute care in people leaving community crisis care. We thus proposed the current study to test the effectiveness of such an intervention. We selected peer support workers as the preferred staff to deliver such an intervention, as they are well-placed to model and encourage active and autonomous recovery from mental health problems. The CORE (CRT Optimisation and Relapse Prevention) self-management trial compares the effectiveness of a peer-provided self-management intervention for people leaving CRT care, with treatment as usual supplemented by a booklet on self-management. The planned sample is 440 participants, including 40 participants in an internal pilot. The primary outcome measure is whether participants are readmitted to acute care over 1 year of follow-up following entry to the trial. Secondary outcomes include self-rated recovery at 4 and at 18 months following trial entry, measured using the Questionnaire on the Process of Recovery. Analysis will follow an intention to treatment principle. Random effects logistic regression modelling with adjustment for clustering by peer support worker will be used to test the primary hypothesis. The CORE self-management trial was approved by the London Camden and Islington Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 12/LO/0988). A Trial Steering Committee and Data Monitoring Committee oversee the progress of the study. We will report on the results of the clinical trial, as well as on the characteristics of the participants and their associations with relapse. ISRCTN 01027104;pre-results stage.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 11%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 57 40%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 15%
Psychology 14 10%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 59 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2020.
All research outputs
#1,744,097
of 33,123,801 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#2,901
of 29,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,893
of 363,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#83
of 607 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,123,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,310 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,441 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 607 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.