↓ Skip to main content

Nutrition impact symptoms and associated outcomes in post-chemoradiotherapy head and neck cancer survivors: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Survivorship, March 2018
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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 Mendeley
Title
Nutrition impact symptoms and associated outcomes in post-chemoradiotherapy head and neck cancer survivors: a systematic review
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11764-018-0687-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sylvia L. Crowder, Katherine G. Douglas, M. Yanina Pepino, Kalika P. Sarma, Anna E. Arthur

Abstract

It is estimated that more than 90% of head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors who underwent chemoradiotherapy experience one or more nutrition impact symptoms (NIS) in the months or years thereafter. Despite the high prevalence, there is limited research addressing long-term impact of NIS on outcomes such as nutrition and quality of life in HNC survivors treated with chemoradiotherapy. To conduct a systematic review of the literature pertaining to the presence of nutrition impact symptoms and their associated outcomes in post-chemoradiotherapy head and neck cancer survivors. A systematic review was conducted across three databases according to PRISMA guidelines and used to identify current literature regarding NIS in HNC survivors. A keyword search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from 2007 to 2017. Studies that met all of the following criteria were included in the review: (1) studies must include human subjects with a HNC diagnosis; (2) study participants must have received chemoradiotherapy; (3) study participants must have been post-treatment for a minimum of 3 months at the time of data collection; (4) full-text articles must have appeared in peer-reviewed journals; (5) papers must have been published in English; (6) studies must be quantitative in nature; (7) studies must have reported at least one NIS; and (8) studies must address at least one of the following outcomes: nutrition, functional status, or quality of life. Two independent reviewers assessed study quality using a predefined set of criteria. A systematic search yielded 1119 papers, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The study reviewed existing evidence of NIS in a variety of HNC survivors ranging from 3 months to greater than 10 years post-chemoradiotherapy treatment. Eight hundred forty-nine study participants were included in the review. Of the 15 studies, 10 were designed as prospective cohort studies, 4 were cross-sectional studies, and 1 was a retrospective cohort study. Functional impairments as a result of chemoradiotherapy to the head and neck are prevalent in research and include dysphagia, xerostomia, trismus, salivary issues, mucositis, and oral pain. NIS negatively influence HNC survivors beyond the acute phase of treatment. These symptoms are associated with decreased nutrition and quality of life. Interventions are necessary to improve survivors' eating challenges beyond the completion of treatment. If practitioners do not follow patients long term, patients may suffer consequences of NIS including malnutrition risk, weight loss, and decreased food intake and quality of life. The prevalence and consequences of nutrition impact symptoms are substantial among head and neck cancer survivors beyond the acute phase of cancer treatment. Oncology clinicians should continuously monitor and manage these symptoms throughout the cancer continuum.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 278 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 16%
Student > Bachelor 30 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 8%
Other 12 4%
Researcher 12 4%
Other 41 15%
Unknown 115 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 52 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Social Sciences 4 1%
Psychology 4 1%
Other 24 9%
Unknown 125 45%
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 23 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,963,436
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Survivorship
#227
of 992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,080
of 332,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Survivorship
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 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 992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 332,456 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.