↓ Skip to main content

Electronic monitoring of self-reported mood: the return of the subjective?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Electronic monitoring of self-reported mood: the return of the subjective?
Published in
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40345-016-0069-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abigail Ortiz, Paul Grof

Abstract

This narrative review describes recent developments in the use of technology for utilizing the self-monitoring of mood, provides some relevant background, and suggests some promising directions. Subjective experience of mood is one of the valuable sources of information about the state of an integrated mind/brain system. During the past century, psychiatry and psychology moved away from subjectivity, emphasizing external observation, precise measurement, and laboratory techniques. This shift, however, provided only a limited improvement in the understanding of mood disorders, and it appears that self-monitoring of mood has the potential to enrich our knowledge, particularly when combined with the advances in technology. Modern technology, with its ability to transfer information from the individual directly to the researcher via electronic applications, enables us now to study mood regulation more thoroughly. Frequent subjective ratings can be helpful in identifying individualized treatment with effective mood stabilizers and recognizing subtypes of mood disorders. The variability of subjective ratings may also help us estimate the increased risk of recurrence and guide a tailored treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 17%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Computer Science 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 16 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,282,319
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#196
of 285 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,083
of 416,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 285 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 416,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 2 of them.