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 |
Promoting Personal Recovery in People with Persisting Psychotic Disorders: Development and Pilot Study of a Novel Digital Intervention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychiatry, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00196 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Neil Thomas, John Farhall, Fiona Foley, Nuwan Dominic Leitan, Kristi-Ann Villagonzalo, Emma Ladd, Cassy Nunan, Sue Farnan, Rosalie Frankish, Tara Smark, Susan L. Rossell, Leon Sterling, Greg Murray, David Jonathon Castle, Michael Kyrios |
| Abstract |
For people with persisting psychotic disorders, personal recovery has become an important target of mental health services worldwide. Strongly influenced by mental health service consumer perspectives, personal recovery refers to being able to live a satisfying and contributing life irrespective of ongoing symptoms and disability. Contact with peers with shared lived experience is often cited as facilitative of recovery. We aimed to develop and pilot a novel recovery-based digitally supported intervention for people with a psychotic illness. We developed a website to be used on a tablet computer by mental health workers to structure therapeutic discussions about personal recovery. Central to the site was a series of video interviews of people with lived experience of psychosis discussing how they had navigated issues within their own recovery based on the Connectedness-Hope-Identity-Meaning-Empowerment model of recovery. We examined the feasibility and acceptability of an 8-session low intensity intervention using this site in 10 participants with persisting psychotic disorders and conducted a proof-of-concept analysis of outcomes. All 10 participants completed the full course of sessions, and it was possible to integrate use of the website into nearly all sessions. Participant feedback confirmed that use of the website was a feasible and acceptable way of working. All participants stated that they would recommend the intervention to others. Post-intervention, personal recovery measured by the Questionnaire for the Process of Recovery had improved by an average standardized effect of d = 0.46, 95% CI [0.07, 0.84], and 8 of the 10 participants reported that their mental health had improved since taking part in the intervention. In-session use of digital resources featuring peer accounts of recovery is feasible and acceptable and shows promising outcomes. A randomized controlled trial is the next step in evaluating the efficacy of this low intensity intervention when delivered in conjunction with routine mental health care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 3 | 27% |
| Australia | 3 | 27% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 33 | 22% |
| Unknown | 43 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 49 | 32% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 49 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 June 2020.
All research outputs
#4,605,430
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#2,251
of 10,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,256
of 422,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#17
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 422,483 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 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.