↓ Skip to main content

Psychological, social and welfare interventions for psychological health and well-being of torture survivors

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
474 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
Psychological, social and welfare interventions for psychological health and well-being of torture survivors
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009317.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nimisha Patel, Blerina Kellezi, Amanda C de C Williams

Abstract

Torture is widespread, with potentially broad and long-lasting impact across physical, psychological, social and other areas of life. Its complex and diverse effects interact with ethnicity, gender, and refugee experience. Health and welfare agencies offer varied rehabilitation services, from conventional mental health treatment to eclectic or needs-based interventions. This review is needed because relatively little outcome research has been done in this field, and no previous systematic review has been conducted. Resources are scarce, and the challenges of providing services can be considerable.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 474 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 463 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 102 22%
Researcher 80 17%
Unspecified 63 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 63 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 44 9%
Other 122 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 136 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 118 25%
Unspecified 82 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 46 10%
Social Sciences 40 8%
Other 52 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 June 2019.
All research outputs
#3,112,069
of 13,549,568 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,709
of 10,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,511
of 231,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#155
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,549,568 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 231,714 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.