↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a Residential Mental Health Recovery Service in North Queensland

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
22 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Evaluation of a Residential Mental Health Recovery Service in North Queensland
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00123
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marion Heyeres, Irina Kinchin, Elise Whatley, Lisa Brophy, Jon Jago, Thomas Wintzloff, Steve Morton, Vinitta Mosby, Narayan Gopalkrishnan, Komla Tsey

Abstract

Evidence shows that subacute mental health recovery occurs best when a person remains active within the community and fulfils meaningful and satisfying roles of their choosing. Several residential care services that incorporate these values have been established in Australia and overseas. This study describes (a) the development of an evaluation framework for a new subacute residential mental health recovery service in regional Australia and (b) reports on the formative evaluation outcomes. Continuous quality improvement and participatory research approaches informed all stages of the development of the evaluation framework. A program logic was established and subsequently tested for practicability. The resultant logic utilizes the Scottish Recovery Indicator 2 (SRI 2) service development tool, Individual Recovery Plans (IRPs), and the impact assessment of the service on psychiatric inpatient admissions (reported separately). Service strengths included a recovery-focused practice that identifies and addresses the basic needs of residents (consumers). The consumers of the service were encouraged to develop their own goals and self-manage their recovery plans. The staff of the service were identified as working effectively in the context of the recovery process; the staff were seen as supported and valued. Areas for improvement included more opportunities for self-management for residents and more feedback from residents and carers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 21%
Researcher 6 18%
Other 3 9%
Librarian 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 22 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,640,987
of 24,151,461 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#714
of 12,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,931
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#21
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,151,461 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 330,334 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.