↓ Skip to main content

Patient- and family-centered care: a qualitative exploration of oncologist perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Patient- and family-centered care: a qualitative exploration of oncologist perspectives
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00520-016-3414-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy K. Nguyen, Glenn S. Bauman, Christopher J. Watling, Karin Hahn

Abstract

Increasingly, patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) is recognized as a valuable component of healthcare reform with rich opportunities for improvement within oncology. Shifting toward PFCC requires physician buy-in; however, research examining their perspectives on PFCC is lacking. We sought to explore oncologists' perspectives on PFCC to identify factors that influence their ability to practice PFCC. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 oncologists (8 radiation, 4 medical, 4 surgical, 2 hematologist-oncologists) at a single Canadian academic cancer institution. Interview data were analyzed using thematic analysis and principles drawn from grounded theory. Subsequently, focus groups consisting of the interviewed participants were facilitated to confirm and elaborate on our findings. Constant comparisons were used to identify recurring themes. Three dominant themes emerged. First, physicians displayed cautious engagement in their approach to PFCC. Collectively, participants understood the general principles of PFCC. However, there was a limited understanding of the value, implications, and motivation for improving PFCC which may create reluctance with physician buy-in. Second, both individual and system barriers to practicing PFCC were identified. A lack of physician acknowledgement and engagement and competing responsibilities emerged as provider-level challenges. System barriers included impaired clinic workflow, physical infrastructure constraints, and delays in access to care. Third, physicians were able to identify existing and potential PFCC behaviors that were feasible within existing system constraints. Advancing PFCC will require continued physician education regarding the value of PFCC, acknowledgement and preservation of effective patient- and family-centered strategies, and creative solutions to address the system constraints to delivering PFCC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Psychology 5 10%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,384,989
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#3,096
of 4,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,128
of 323,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#55
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,597 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 323,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.