| Title |
Metacognitive Therapy for Emotional Distress in Adult Cancer Survivors: A Case Series
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Therapy and Research, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10608-017-9862-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter L. Fisher, Angela Byrne, Peter Salmon |
| Abstract |
Many adult cancer survivors experience persistent emotional distress after completing cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to test the potential of a brief transdiagnostic psychological intervention-metacognitive therapy (MCT)-in reducing emotional distress in adult cancer survivors. A non-concurrent multiple baseline design with 3- and 6-months follow-up was used to evaluate the effects of MCT in four patients consecutively referred to a psycho-oncology service. Each patient received six 1-h sessions of MCT. Anxiety, depression, worry/rumination, fear of cancer recurrence and metacognitive beliefs were assessed using self-report questionnaires. MCT was associated with clinically significant reductions in anxiety, depression, fear of cancer recurrence, worry/rumination and metacognitive beliefs at the end of treatment, and gains were maintained in all patients to 3-months follow-up and in three out of four patients to 6-months follow-up. MCT is a promising brief transdiagnostic approach to psychological morbidity in adult survivors of cancer. Larger scale controlled trials are now required. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 29% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 17% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 26 | 45% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
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 14 October 2018.
All research outputs
#4,281,634
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Therapy and Research
#243
of 953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,548
of 316,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Therapy and Research
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 953 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 316,790 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.