| Title |
The effectiveness of police custody assessments in identifying suspects with intellectual disabilities and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-11-248 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan Young, Emily J Goodwin, Ottilie Sedgwick, Gisli H Gudjonsson |
| Abstract |
Intellectual Disabilities (ID) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are recognized psychological vulnerabilities in police interviews and court proceedings in England and Wales. The aims of this study were to investigate: (a) the prevalence of ID and/or ADHD among suspects detained at a large London metropolitan police station and their relationship with conduct disorder (CD), (b) the impact of their condition on police staff resources, (c) the effectiveness of current custody assessment tools in identifying psychological vulnerabilities, and (d) the use of 'Appropriate Adults' in interviews. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 40% |
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| India | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 130 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Researcher | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 21% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 44 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 34 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,987,662
of 25,882,826 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,388
of 4,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,185
of 317,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#28
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,882,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 317,545 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 50% of its contemporaries.