↓ Skip to main content

Validating self-report and proxy reports of the Dexamethasone Symptom Questionnaire -Chronic for the evaluation of longer-term corticosteroid toxicity

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Validating self-report and proxy reports of the Dexamethasone Symptom Questionnaire -Chronic for the evaluation of longer-term corticosteroid toxicity
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00520-015-2897-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meera Agar, Eng-Siew Koh, Emma Gibbs, Elizabeth H. Barnes, Elizabeth Hovey, Ann Livingstone, Kate Sawkins, Richard Chye, Melanie R. Lovell, Katherine Clark, Janette Vardy, Madeleine King, On behalf of the Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology (COGNO)

Abstract

In brain tumours, brain metastases or advanced cancer; treatment with corticosteroids, side effects can add to symptoms. These are best assessed by patients, complementing clinical assessment. We assessed the feasibility and validity of the Dexamethasone Symptom Questionnaire-Chronic (DSQ-Chronic), patient and caregiver versions. A longitudinal cohort study was conducted, collecting clinician-rated toxicity, performance status, dexamethasone dose and DSQ-Chronic (patient and caregiver versions) at baseline, then 2, 4 and 8 weeks later. Patients had a primary malignant brain tumour, brain metastases, or advanced cancer; Karnofsky Performance Status ≥40 and predicted survival ≥8 weeks. Analysis included questionnaire completion rates, frequency and severity of dexamethasone-attributable side effects, agreement between patient and caregiver ratings, comparison with clinician-rated toxicity and correlation with performance status. Sixty-six patients were recruited (mean age 60 years), with their caregivers. Completion of questionnaires was over 90 % for the dyad at baseline but dropped over time, with caregiver completion rates higher at all timepoints. Agreement between patients and proxies was fair to moderate, and while proxies systematically overestimated symptom severity on DSQ-chronic total scores, the bias was less than 10 points. Patient and clinician agreement was higher for more objective symptoms. The DSQ-Chronic is feasible when the patient is relatively well. As capacity to complete the DSQ-Chronic diminishes, caregivers can be proxy-raters. Clinicians capture corticosteroid toxicities, which may not be obvious to the patient. The DSQ-Chronic, patient and caregiver versions, are useful tools to be used with clinician assessment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 14 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,862,984
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,663
of 4,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,832
of 266,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#21
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 266,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.