↓ Skip to main content

Frequent and long‐term follow‐up of health‐related quality of life following allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Cancer Care, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Frequent and long‐term follow‐up of health‐related quality of life following allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Published in
European Journal of Cancer Care, July 2015
DOI 10.1111/ecc.12350
Pubmed ID
Authors

U Frödin, K Lotfi, V Fomichov, G Juliusson, S Börjeson

Abstract

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) was evaluated in 94 patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) after myeloablative (MAC, n = 18) or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC, n = 76). HRQL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ C-30 during the inpatient period as well as during the following 3 years, i.e. at baseline and 12 times thereafter. Functional status and global quality of life decreased from baseline to weeks 2 and 3, especially role and social functions. Symptoms increased significantly during the first 3 weeks, particularly appetite loss, nausea and vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue. It took at least 1 year for HRQL to return to the baseline level. The only function that improved significantly 3 years after HSCT was role function. Patients treated with MAC experienced significantly worse HRQL at baseline than patients treated with RIC, as well as more pain, sleep disturbance and appetite loss in weeks 3 and 4. Patients with extensive chronic graft-versus-host disease experienced reduced HRQL. These results provide a clinically useful overview of patients' HRQL during and after HSCT and indicate when they require increased support. The results demonstrate the importance of close follow-ups during the first year after HSCT to improve preventive or supportive interventions.

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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 18%
Other 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 33 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 14%
Psychology 4 5%
Engineering 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 36 47%
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 10 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cancer Care
#862
of 1,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,541
of 276,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cancer Care
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. 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 276,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.