↓ Skip to main content

Fear of cancer recurrence: a theoretical review and novel cognitive processing formulation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Survivorship, January 2016
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
48 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
192 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
207 Mendeley
Title
Fear of cancer recurrence: a theoretical review and novel cognitive processing formulation
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11764-015-0512-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna E Fardell, Belinda Thewes, Jane Turner, Jemma Gilchrist, Louise Sharpe, Allan ‘Ben’ Smith, Afaf Girgis, Phyllis Butow

Abstract

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is prevalent among survivors. However, a comprehensive and universally accepted theoretical framework of FCR to guide intervention is lacking. This paper reviews theoretical frameworks previously used to explain FCR and describes the formulation of a novel theoretical framework for FCR. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify conceptual frameworks or theories applied to FCR. MEDLINE, PubMED, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched. Identified conceptual frameworks were reviewed for strength of evidence supporting their validity. Of 558 papers initially identified, 16 made reference to six different conceptual frameworks relating to FCR. The most comprehensive and evidence-based theoretical approach is the Common Sense Model (CSM). Other approaches have limited evidence supporting their application to FCR. Two theoretical approaches developed in the context of emotional disorders that appear to be highly relevant to FCR: the Self-Regulatory Executive Function (S-REF) model and Relational Frame Theory were combined with the CSM to produce a novel cognitive processing account of FCR. Few conceptual frameworks have been used consistently to guide FCR research, and not all frameworks are empirically well supported, suggesting that further discussion regarding the conceptualisation of FCR is needed. The novel theoretical framework for FCR presented highlights the multidimensional nature of FCR and the importance of cognitive processing and metacognitions in the development and maintenance of FCR. The novel theoretical formulation of FCR outlined here provides a much-needed comprehensive framework to further investigate and address FCR in cancer survivors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 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 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 207 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 15%
Student > Master 30 14%
Researcher 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 52 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 79 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 8%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 20 10%
Unknown 61 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 16 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,296,669
of 25,205,864 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Survivorship
#64
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,877
of 406,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Survivorship
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,205,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 406,570 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.