| Title |
Congruence of multiple patient-related outcomes within a single day
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-018-4372-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter A. S. Johnstone, Hailey W. Bulls, Jun-Min Zhou, Jae K. Lee, Diane Portman, Hsiang-Hsuan Michael Yu, Heather Jim |
| Abstract |
Clinic-based collection of patient-reported outcome (PRO) quantifying symptom burden provide crucial information for effective care. We have pioneered point-of-care electronic assessment using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) with direct linkage to the electronic medical record (EMR) which has been readily adopted by our oncology patients. As some patients may complete more than one ESAS per day in different clinics, the goal of the current analyses was to compare the within-patient congruence of ESAS assessments completed on the same day. A total of 9621 ESAS records from 4021 patients of the Supportive Care Medicine and Radiation Oncology clinics between February and November 2017 were retrieved from the EMR. Patients completed the ESAS-r-CSS, which added sleep disturbance, constipation, and spiritual well-being domains to the standard ESAS-r. A total of 65 patients provided more than one ESAS report within the same day. The data were curated, removing those sporadic missing data and those with obvious technical error. This process left 130 samples for analysis. There was no statistical difference among different ESAS collection intervals for domains of tiredness, nausea, appetite, overall well-being, spiritual well-being, constipation, and difficulty sleeping, but there was a significant difference for pain, drowsiness, shortness of breath, depression, and anxiety. Repeat tests that occurred within 1 h of one another demonstrated higher congruence than those completed over longer periods. Patients reported significant worsening of several symptoms over the course of the day, with greatest concordance observed within smaller time periods. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Psychology | 5 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 36 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 March 2019.
All research outputs
#14,137,809
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,742
of 4,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,537
of 331,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#66
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 331,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.