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 |
Online Peer-to-Peer Support for Young People With Mental Health Problems: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JMIR Mental Health, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2196/mental.4418 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kathina Ali, Louise Farrer, Amelia Gulliver, Kathleen M Griffiths |
| Abstract |
Adolescence and early adulthood are critical periods for the development of mental disorders. Online peer-to-peer communication is popular among young people and may improve mental health by providing social support. Previous systematic reviews have targeted Internet support groups for adults with mental health problems, including depression. However, there have been no systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of online peer-to-peer support in improving the mental health of adolescents and young adults. The aim of this review was to systematically identify available evidence for the effectiveness of online peer-to peer support for young people with mental health problems. The PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane databases were searched using keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms. Retrieved abstracts (n=3934) were double screened and coded. Studies were included if they (1) investigated an online peer-to-peer interaction, (2) the interaction discussed topics related to mental health, (3) the age range of the sample was between 12 to 25 years, and (4) the study evaluated the effectiveness of the peer-to-peer interaction. Six studies satisfied the inclusion criteria for the current review. The studies targeted a range of mental health problems including depression and anxiety (n=2), general psychological problems (n=1), eating disorders (n=1), and substance use (tobacco) (n=2). The majority of studies investigated Internet support groups (n=4), and the remaining studies focused on virtual reality chat sessions (n=2). In almost all studies (n=5), the peer support intervention was moderated by health professionals, researchers or consumers. Studies employed a range of study designs including randomized controlled trials (n=3), pre-post studies (n=2) and one randomized trial. Overall, two of the randomized controlled trials were associated with a significant positive outcome in comparison to the control group at post-intervention. In the remaining four studies, peer-to-peer support was not found to be effective. This systematic review identified an overall lack of high-quality studies examining online peer-to-peer support for young people. Given that peer support is frequently used as an adjunct to Internet interventions for a variety of mental health conditions, there is an urgent need to determine the effectiveness of peer support alone as an active intervention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 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 | 12 | 25% |
| United States | 6 | 13% |
| Australia | 5 | 10% |
| Canada | 3 | 6% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 35 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 13% |
| Scientists | 6 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 411 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 405 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 71 | 17% |
| Researcher | 59 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 5% |
| Other | 50 | 12% |
| Unknown | 128 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 103 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 44 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 48 | 12% |
| Unknown | 139 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 21 July 2023.
All research outputs
#593,283
of 25,081,505 outputs
Outputs from JMIR Mental Health
#44
of 929 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,752
of 271,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JMIR Mental Health
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,081,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 929 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 271,829 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.