↓ Skip to main content

Service user involvement in clinical guideline development and implementation: Learning from mental health service users in the UK

Overview of attention for article published in International Review of Psychiatry, October 2011
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Service user involvement in clinical guideline development and implementation: Learning from mental health service users in the UK
Published in
International Review of Psychiatry, October 2011
DOI 10.3109/09540261.2011.606802
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The participation of service users and the public in the development of clinical guidelines is increasingly valued in international guideline programmes. This paper extends the findings of Harding et al.'s (2010) exploration of the views of service users who participated in developing NICE mental health guidelines. This analysis considered the relative value of personal versus professional knowledge and experience, the barriers to service users contributing effectively in guideline development, the unspoken 'rules' concerning decision making, and issues of power and group dynamics. We combine these insights with observations from research in guideline development and with advances in the recovery movement and in the shared decision-making clinical model to suggest areas of improvement in guideline development, notably: translating evidence to recommendations, optimizing the acceptability of treatment recommendations to service users, and reconciling different types of knowledge.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 77 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 %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Social Sciences 10 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 17 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 December 2025.
All research outputs
#4,466,550
of 33,704,742 outputs
Outputs from International Review of Psychiatry
#274
of 1,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,825
of 188,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Review of Psychiatry
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,704,742 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,077 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 188,141 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.