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 |
The efficacy of resilience training programs: a systematic review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aaron L Leppin, Michael R Gionfriddo, Amit Sood, Victor M Montori, Patricia J Erwin, Claudia Zeballos-Palacios, Pavithra R Bora, Megan M Dulohery, Juan Pablo Brito, Kasey R Boehmer, Jon C Tilburt |
| Abstract |
Resilience has been defined as the ability of individuals to manage and adapt to stress and life challenges. Training programs that develop and/or enhance resilience may have efficacy in improving health, well-being, and quality of life. Because patients with chronic conditions must reliably self-manage their health, strategies to bolster resilience in this population may be of particular value. The objectives of this systematic review are to synthesize the evidence of resilience training program efficacy in improving outcomes related to quality of life, self-efficacy and activation, and resilience and coping ability in: 1) diverse adult populations; and 2) patients with chronic conditions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 164 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 11% |
| Researcher | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 34 | 20% |
| Unknown | 36 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 55 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 11% |
| Unknown | 40 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 16 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,285,344
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#192
of 1,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,970
of 221,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#2
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 221,372 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 90% of its contemporaries.