↓ 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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
The Validity and Reliability Characteristics of the M-BACK Questionnaire to Assess the Barriers, Attitudes, Confidence, and Knowledge of Mental Health Staff Regarding Metabolic Health of Mental Health Service Users
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00321
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Addressing the burden of poor physical health and the subsequent gap in life expectancy experienced by people with mental illness is a major priority in mental health services. To equip mental health staff with the competence to deliver evidence-based interventions, targeted staff training regarding metabolic health is required. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of staff training regarding metabolic health, we aimed to develop a succinct measure to determine the barriers, attitudes, confidence, and knowledge of health practitioners through the development and test-retest reliability of the Metabolic-Barriers, Attitudes, Confidence, and Knowledge Questionnaire (M-BACK). The M-BACK questionnaire was developed to evaluate the impact of specialized training in metabolic health care for mental health nurses. Content of the M-BACK was developed from a literature review and refined by an expert review panel and validated via a piloting process. To determine the test-retest reliability of the M-BACK, 31 nursing students recruited from the University of Notre Dame, Sydney completed the questionnaire on two separate occasions, 7 days apart. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for the total score, as well as each of the four domains. Pilot testing was undertaken with a sample of 106 mental health nurses with a mean age 48.2, ranging from 24 to 63 years of age, who participated in six training courses. Questionnaire development resulted in a 16-item instrument, with each item is scored on a five-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Test-retest reliability of the M-BACK was completed by 30 of 31 nursing students recruited, ICCs ranged from 0.62 to 0.96. The M-BACK is a reliable measure of the key elements of practitioner perceptions of barriers, and their knowledge, attitudes, and confidence regarding metabolic monitoring in people with mental illness. It can be used to assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing uptake of metabolic monitoring, a key component of programs to reduce the life expectancy gap in people living with severe mental illness.

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 19 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 72 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 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 28 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Psychology 4 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 29 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,854,878
of 32,775,379 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,124
of 21,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,246
of 479,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#17
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,775,379 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. 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 479,755 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.