↓ Skip to main content

HIV prevention advice for people with serious mental illness

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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.
Title
HIV prevention advice for people with serious mental illness
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009639.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Wright, Athfah Akhtar, Graeme E Tosh, Andrew V Clifton

Abstract

People with serious mental illness have rates of Human Immuno-deficiency Virus (HIV) infection higher than expected in the general population for the same demographic area. Despite this elevated prevalence, UK national strategies around sexual health and HIV prevention do not state that people with serious mental illness are a high risk group. However, a significant proportion in this group are sexually active and engage in HIV-risk behaviours including having multiple sexual partners, infrequent use of condoms and trading sex for money or drugs. Therefore we propose the provision of HIV prevention advice could enhance the physical and social well being of this population. To assess the effects of HIV prevention advice in reducing morbidity, mortality and preserving the quality of life in people with serious mental illness. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (24 January 2012; 4 July 2016). We planned to include all randomised controlled trials focusing on HIV prevention advice versus standard care or comparing HIV prevention advice with other more focused methods of delivering care or information for people with serious mental illness. Review authors (NW, AC, AA, GT) independently screened search results and did not identify any studies that fulfilled the review's criteria. We did not identify any randomised studies that evaluated advice regarding HIV for people with serious mental illness. The excluded studies illustrate that randomisation of packages of care relevant to both people with serious mental illness and HIV risk are possible. Policy makers, clinicians, researchers and service users need to collaborate to produce guidance on how best to provide advice for people with serious mental illness in preventing the spread of HIV infection. It is entirely feasible that this could be within the context of a well-designed simple large randomised study.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 21%
Researcher 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 28 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 15%
Psychology 14 10%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 35 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,816,996
of 14,668,321 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,566
of 11,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,740
of 263,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#115
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,668,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 263,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.