↓ Skip to main content

Psychosocial interventions by general practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2007
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
188 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
Psychosocial interventions by general practitioners
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003494.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus J.H. Huibers, Anna Beurskens, Gijs Bleijenberg, Constant Paul van Schayck

Abstract

Many patients visit their general practitioner (GP) because of problems that are psychosocial in origin. However, for many of these problems there is no evidence-based treatment available in primary care, and these patients place time-consuming demands on their GP. Therefore, GPs could benefit from tools to help these patients more effectively and efficiently. In this light, it is important to assess whether structured psychosocial interventions might be an appropriate tool for GPs. Previous reviews have shown that psychosocial interventions in primary care seem more effective than usual care. However, these interventions were mostly performed by health professionals other than the GP.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 182 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 16%
Student > Master 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 39 21%
Unknown 44 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 34%
Psychology 31 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 51 27%
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 30 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,638,157
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,186
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,957
of 77,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#21
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 77,883 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.