↓ Skip to main content

Dance movement therapy for dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
19 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 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
Dance movement therapy for dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011022.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vicky Karkou, Bonnie Meekums

Abstract

Dementia is a collective name for different degenerative brain syndromes which, according to Alzheimer's Disease International, affects approximately 35.6 million people worldwide. The latest NICE guideline for dementia highlights the value of diverse treatment options for the different stages and symptoms of dementia including non-pharmacological treatments. Relevant literature also argues for the value of interventions that acknowledge the complexity of the condition and address the person as a whole, including their physical, emotional, social and cognitive processes. At the same time, there is growing literature that highlights the capacity of the arts and embodied practices to address this complexity. Dance movement therapy is an embodied psychological intervention that can address complexity and thus, may be useful for people with dementia, but its effectiveness remains unclear. To assess the effects of dance movement therapy on behavioural, social, cognitive and emotional symptoms of people with dementia in comparison to no treatment, standard care or any other treatment. Also, to compare different forms of dance movement therapy (e.g. Laban-based dance movement therapy, Chacian dance movement therapy or Authentic Movement). Searches took place up to March 2016 through ALOIS, Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement's Specialized Register, which covers CENTRAL, a number of major healthcare databases and trial registers, and grey literature sources. We checked bibliographies of relevant studies and reviews, and contacted professional associations, educational programmes and experts from around the world. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, including cross-over design and cluster-RCTs for inclusion. Studies considered had to include people with dementia, in any age group and in any setting, with interventions delivered by a dance movement therapy practitioner who (i) had received formal training (ii) was a dance movement therapist in training or (iii) was otherwise recognised as a dance movement therapist in the country in which the study was conducted. The two review authors independently reviewed studies on an abstract/title level and again after reading the full paper, and we independently evaluated methodological quality. Of the 102 studies identified through electronic searches and personal communication, after de-duplication we screened 80 at title/abstract level. We then reviewed 19 full papers, none of which met the inclusion criteria. Although three studies mentioned dance movement therapy as their intervention, they were excluded because they were not delivered by a qualified dance movement therapy practitioner. As a result, no studies were included in this review. Trials of high methodological quality, large sample sizes and clarity in the way the intervention is put together and delivered are needed to assess whether dance movement therapy is an effective intervention for dementia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 203 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 37 18%
Student > Bachelor 37 18%
Student > Master 35 17%
Researcher 23 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 11%
Other 48 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 22%
Unspecified 45 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 17%
Psychology 27 13%
Social Sciences 16 8%
Other 35 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 22 May 2019.
All research outputs
#303,355
of 13,396,110 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#817
of 10,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,016
of 345,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#28
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,396,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 345,790 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 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.