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 |
Computerized positive mental imagery training versus cognitive control training versus treatment as usual in inpatient mental health settings: study protocol for a randomized controlled feasibility trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40814-018-0325-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon E. Blackwell, Katharina Westermann, Marcella L. Woud, Jan C. Cwik, Torsten Neher, Christian Graz, Peter W. Nyhuis, Jürgen Margraf |
| Abstract |
Enhancing the capacity to experience positive affect could help improve recovery across a range of areas of mental health. Experimental psychopathology research indicates that a computerized cognitive training paradigm involving generation of positive mental imagery can increase state positive affect, and more recent clinical studies have suggested that this training could be used as an adjunct treatment module to target symptoms related to positive affect deficits, specifically anhedonia. The current study investigates the feasibility of adding a positive mental imagery computerized training module to treatment for patients in inpatient mental health settings, with a focus on increasing positive affect and reducing anhedonia. The positive mental imagery training (PMIT) is added to treatment as usual (TAU) in the inpatient setting, and compared to TAU alone, or TAU plus an alternative cognitive training module not hypothesized to increase positive affect, cognitive control training (CCT). The study is a feasibility randomized controlled trial with three parallel arms. Up to 90 patients admitted to inpatient mental health treatment clinics in Germany will be randomized to PMIT + TAU, CCT + TAU, or TAU on a 1:1:1 ratio. PMIT or CCT consist of an introductory session followed by up to 8 full training sessions over 2 weeks. All three arms (including TAU) include regular completion of mood measures over the 2-week period. Outcome measures are completed pre and post this 2-week training/monitoring period, and at 2-week follow-up. Data will be presented in the form of both raw means and standardized effect sizes, with 95% confidence intervals, for both intention-to-treat and per-protocol samples. The study will inform feasibility of conducting a fully powered randomized controlled trial investigating the addition of the positive mental imagery training as a treatment adjunct to inpatient treatments for mental health, including potential refinement of study procedures, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and preliminary indications of the likely range of effect sizes. clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02958228 (date registered: 4 November 2016). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 24 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 July 2019.
All research outputs
#20,015,120
of 24,594,795 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#936
of 1,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,595
of 335,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#29
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,594,795 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,177 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 335,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.