↓ Skip to main content

A randomized head to head trial of MoodSwings.net.au: An internet based self-help program for bipolar disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Affective Disorders, January 2015
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
236 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
A randomized head to head trial of MoodSwings.net.au: An internet based self-help program for bipolar disorder
Published in
Journal of Affective Disorders, January 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2014.08.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sue Lauder, Andrea Chester, David Castle, Seetal Dodd, Emma Gliddon, Lesley Berk, James Chamberlain, Britt Klein, Monica Gilbert, David W Austin, Michael Berk

Abstract

Adjunctive psychosocial interventions are efficacious in bipolar disorder, but their incorporation into routine management plans are often confounded by cost and access constraints. We report here a comparative evaluation of two online programs hosted on a single website (www.moodswings.net.au). A basic version, called MoodSwings (MS), contains psychoeducation material and asynchronous discussion boards; and a more interactive program, MoodSwings Plus (MS-Plus), combined the basic psychoeducation material and discussion boards with elements of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. These programs were evaluated in a head-to-head study design.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
Spain 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 229 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 46 19%
Student > Master 39 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 15%
Student > Bachelor 32 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 8%
Other 50 21%
Unknown 15 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 85 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 44 19%
Social Sciences 27 11%
Computer Science 12 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 5%
Other 32 14%
Unknown 25 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 June 2015.
All research outputs
#569,553
of 12,009,201 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Affective Disorders
#292
of 5,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,746
of 210,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Affective Disorders
#11
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,009,201 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 210,833 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 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.