↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Bridging the gap between education and appropriate use of benzodiazepines in psychiatric clinical practice

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, July 2015
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
Title
Bridging the gap between education and appropriate use of benzodiazepines in psychiatric clinical practice
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s83130
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Fiorillo, Bernardo Dell'Osso, Umberto Albert, Anna Rita Atti, Claudia Carmassi, Giuseppe Carrà, Fiammetta Cosci, Valeria Del Vecchio, Marco Di Nicola, Silvia Ferrari, Arianna Goracci, Felice Iasevoli, Mario Luciano, Giovanni Martinotti, Maria Giulia Nanni, Alessandra Nivoli, Federica Pinna, Nicola Poloni, Maurizio Pompili, Gaia Sampogna, Ilaria Tarricone, Sarah Tosato, Umberto Volpe

Abstract

More than half a century after their discovery, benzodiazepines (BDZs) still represent one of the largest and most widely prescribed groups of psychotropic compounds, not only in clinical psychiatry but also in the entire medical field. Over the last two decades, however, there has been an increased focus on the development of antidepressants and antipsychotics on the part of the pharmaceutical industry, clinicians, and researchers, with a reduced interest in BDZs, in spite of their widespread clinical use. As a consequence, many psychiatric residents, medical students, nurses, and other mental health professionals might receive poor academic teaching and training regarding these agents, and have the false impression that BDZs represent an outdated chapter in clinical psychopharmacology. However, recent advances in the field, including findings concerning epidemiology, addiction risk, and drug interactions, as well as the introduction of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition with related diagnostic changes, strongly encourage an updated appraisal of the use of BDZs in clinical practice. During a recent thematic event convened with the aim of approaching this topic in a critical manner, a group of young Italian psychiatrists attempted to highlight possible flaws in current teaching pathways, identify the main clinical pros and cons regarding current use of BDZs in clinical practice, and provide an updated overview of their use across specific clinical areas and patient populations. The main results are presented and discussed in this review.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 147 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Master 15 10%
Other 11 7%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Other 48 33%
Unknown 32 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 28%
Psychology 21 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 6%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 34 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#2,274,978
of 14,535,828 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#338
of 2,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,502
of 235,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#17
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,535,828 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 235,391 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.