↓ Skip to main content

Evidence of depression-associated circadian rhythm disruption and regret in prostate cancer patients after surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, October 2017
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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Evidence of depression-associated circadian rhythm disruption and regret in prostate cancer patients after surgery
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-3913-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne Christie, Christopher F Sharpley, Vicki Bitsika, David Christie

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between prostate cancer (PCa) patients' regret that their surgery harmed them, and their scores on the two key symptoms of major depressive disorder (depressed mood, anhedonia) and a symptom of melancholic depression (disruption to circadian rhythm). Forty PCa patients who had received surgery for their PCa completed a postal survey including background information, regret about surgery that 'did them a lot of harm' and three items drawn from the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale measuring depressed mood, anhedonia and circadian rhythm disruption. There were significant correlations between all three symptoms of depression (depressed mood, anhedonia, disruption to circadian rhythm) and between patients' regret that surgery did them a lot of harm and their circadian rhythm disruption, but not between depressed mood or anhedonia and regret about surgery doing harm. These findings suggest that PCa patients' post-surgery regrets about major harm may lead to a significant disruption in a central physiological function and raise the need to consider this side effect of surgery when planning supportive services for these men.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Professor 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 13 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 19%
Psychology 5 14%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 01 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,732,117
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#521
of 4,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,017
of 323,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#16
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 323,110 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.