↓ Skip to main content

Choosing between Internet-based psychodynamic versus cognitive behavioral therapy for depression: a pilot preference study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, October 2013
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 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
Choosing between Internet-based psychodynamic versus cognitive behavioral therapy for depression: a pilot preference study
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-244x-13-268
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Johansson, Anna Nyblom, Per Carlbring, Pim Cuijpers, Gerhard Andersson

Abstract

Major depression is a world-wide problem that can be treated with various forms of psychotherapy. There is strong research support for treating major depression using cognitive behavior therapy delivered in the format of guided self-help via the Internet (ICBT). Recent research also suggests that psychodynamic psychotherapy can be delivered as guided self-help via the Internet (IPDT) and that it seem to be as effective as ICBT for mild to moderate depression. However, no head-to-head comparison between the two treatments exists. In the field of Internet interventions it is largely unexplored if treatment preference affects outcome and adherence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 166 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 19%
Student > Master 31 18%
Student > Bachelor 24 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 11 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 99 57%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 18%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 15 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 07 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,106,177
of 12,819,611 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#466
of 2,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,047
of 179,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#61
of 338 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,819,611 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,970 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 179,384 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 338 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.