↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes of an electronic social network intervention with neuro-oncology patient family caregivers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuro-Oncology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Outcomes of an electronic social network intervention with neuro-oncology patient family caregivers
Published in
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11060-018-2909-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maija Reblin, Dana Ketcher, Peter Forsyth, Eduardo Mendivil, Lauren Kane, Justin Pok, Miriah Meyer, Yelena P. Wu, Jim Agutter

Abstract

Informal family caregivers (FCG) are an integral and crucial human component in the cancer care continuum. However, research and interventions to help alleviate documented anxiety and burden on this group is lacking. To address the absence of effective interventions, we developed the electronic Support Network Assessment Program (eSNAP) which aims to automate the capture and visualization of social support, an important target for overall FCG support. This study seeks to describe the preliminary efficacy and outcomes of the eSNAP intervention. Forty FCGs were enrolled into a longitudinal, two-group randomized design to compare the eSNAP intervention in caregivers of patients with primary brain tumors against controls who did not receive the intervention. Participants were followed for six weeks with questionnaires to assess demographics, caregiver burden, anxiety, depression, and social support. Questionnaires given at baseline (T1) and then 3-weeks (T2), and 6-weeks (T3) post baseline questionnaire. FCGs reported high caregiver burden and distress at baseline, with burden remaining stable over the course of the study. The intervention group was significantly less depressed, but anxiety remained stable across groups. With the lessons learned and feedback obtained from FCGs, this study is the first step to developing an effective social support intervention to support FCGs and healthcare providers in improving cancer care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 122 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 56 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 55 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 July 2020.
All research outputs
#14,424,488
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#1,829
of 2,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,480
of 330,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#32
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,994 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 330,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 58% of its contemporaries.