↓ Skip to main content

Mental Health Providers’ Decision-Making Around the Implementation of Evidence-Based Treatment for PTSD

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
Mental Health Providers’ Decision-Making Around the Implementation of Evidence-Based Treatment for PTSD
Published in
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11414-015-9489-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Princess E. Osei-Bonsu, Rendelle E. Bolton, Shannon Wiltsey Stirman, Susan V. Eisen, Lawrence Herz, Maura E. Pellowe

Abstract

It is estimated that <15% of veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have engaged in two evidence-based psychotherapies highly recommended by VA-cognitive processing therapy (CPT) and prolonged exposure (PE). CPT and PE guidelines specify which patients are appropriate, but research suggests that providers may be more selective than the guidelines. In addition, PTSD clinical guidelines encourage "shared decision-making," but there is little research on what processes providers use to make decisions about CPT/PE. Sixteen licensed psychologists and social workers from two VA medical centers working with ≥1 patient with PTSD were interviewed about patient factors considered and decision-making processes for CPT/PE use. Qualitative analyses revealed that patient readiness and comorbid conditions influenced decisions to use or refer patients with PTSD for CPT/PE. Providers reported mentally derived and instances of patient-involved decision-making around CPT/PE use. Continued efforts to assist providers in making informed and collaborative decisions about CPT/PE use are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 29 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 31 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,146,941
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#321
of 469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,176
of 400,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 400,562 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.