| Title |
Music-based interventions in palliative cancer care: a review of quantitative studies and neurobiological literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-013-1841-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Archie, Eduardo Bruera, Lorenzo Cohen |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to review quantitative literature pertaining to studies of music-based interventions in palliative cancer care and to review the neurobiological literature that may bare relevance to the findings from these studies. A narrative review was performed, with particular emphasis on RCTs, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. The Cochrane Library, Ovid, PubMed, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, and ProQuest were searched for the subject headings music, music therapy, cancer, oncology, palliative care, pain, anxiety, depression, mood, quality of life, prevalence, neuroscience, functional imaging, endogenous opioids, GABA, 5HT, dopamine, and permutations of these same search terms. Data for the review were comprised of articles published between 1970 and 2012. References of all the cited articles were also reviewed. Available evidence suggests that music-based interventions may have a positive impact on pain, anxiety, mood disturbance, and quality of life in cancer patients. Advances in neurobiology may provide insight into the potential mechanisms by which music impacts these outcomes. More research is needed to determine what subpopulation of cancer patients is most likely to respond to music-based interventions, what interventions are most effective for individual outcomes, and what measurement parameters best gauge their effectiveness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 States | 6 | 35% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 6% |
| Georgia | 1 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 24% |
| Scientists | 2 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 336 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 328 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 51 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 42 | 13% |
| Other | 34 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 9% |
| Researcher | 27 | 8% |
| Other | 59 | 18% |
| Unknown | 93 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 82 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 48 | 14% |
| Psychology | 44 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 18 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 4% |
| Other | 34 | 10% |
| Unknown | 95 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 14 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,493,606
of 24,980,180 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#163
of 4,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,997
of 200,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,980,180 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,975 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 200,099 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.