| Title |
The role of physical rehabilitation in stem cell transplantation patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-015-2744-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amir Steinberg, Arash Asher, Charlotte Bailey, Jack B. Fu |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this paper is to review the evidence for the role of physical rehabilitation in stem cell transplantation patients. We will also review the literature and discuss professional experiences on how rehabilitation can play a role in stem cell transplant care and survivorship. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is a procedure that has evolved substantially over the years to help treat multiple conditions, particularly hematologic malignancies. HCT can be very stressful on the body and can leave patients weakened and sometimes quite debilitated. Supportive care measures have advanced to improve the quality of life and overall survival of HCT survivors. One key component of improved supportive care is gaining increased attention, and that is physical medicine and rehabilitation. Its role in HCT survivorship care is expanding, and new insight and research within the discipline have focused on fatigue, inflammation, exercise, and the development of structured rehabilitation programs to improve the musculoskeletal sequelae of transplantation. This literature review has demonstrated the utility of physical rehabilitation in HCT, its impact on cancer-related fatigue, and to outline the current state of the literature on these topics. The paper delves into a background of HCT. Cancer-related fatigue in HCT is then discussed and summarized, and the role that exercise plays in modifying such fatigue is outlined. We then outline the models and the impact that physical rehabilitation may play in HCT recipients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 129 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 15% |
| Unknown | 41 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 41 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,148,174
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,751
of 4,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,480
of 264,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#22
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,580 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 264,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 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 70% of its contemporaries.