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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
There are no randomized controlled trials that support the United States Preventive Services Task Force guideline on screening for depression in primary care: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-12-13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brett D Thombs, Roy C Ziegelstein, Michelle Roseman, Lorie A Kloda, John PA Ioannidis |
| Abstract |
The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends screening adults for depression in primary care settings when staff-assisted depression management programs are available. This recommendation, however, is based on evidence from depression management programs conducted with patients already identified as depressed, even though screening is intended to identify depressed patients not already recognized or treated. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate whether there is evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that depression screening benefits patients in primary care, using an explicit definition of screening. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 23% |
| Spain | 5 | 11% |
| United States | 4 | 9% |
| Canada | 2 | 5% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 52% |
| Scientists | 9 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 127 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 33 | 25% |
| Unknown | 25 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 36% |
| Psychology | 19 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 27 June 2021.
All research outputs
#925,783
of 25,543,275 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#646
of 4,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,950
of 323,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#4
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,543,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.7. 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 323,691 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 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.