↓ Skip to main content

Association between patient-provider communication and lung cancer stigma

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Association between patient-provider communication and lung cancer stigma
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00520-015-3014-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Megan Johnson Shen, Heidi A. Hamann, Anna J. Thomas, Jamie S. Ostroff

Abstract

The majority (95 %) of lung cancer patients report stigma, with 48 % of lung cancer patients specifically reporting feeling stigmatized by their medical providers. Typically associated with the causal link to smoking and the historically poor prognosis, lung cancer stigma can be seen as a risk factor for poor psychosocial and medical outcomes in the context of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment. Thus, modifiable targets for lung cancer stigma-reducing interventions are needed. The present study sought to test the hypothesis that good patient-provider communication is associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma. Lung cancer patients (n = 231) across varying stages of disease participated in a cross-sectional, multisite study designed to understand lung cancer stigma. Patients completed several survey measures, including demographic and clinical characteristics, a measure of patient-provider communication (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Program or CAHPS), and a measure of lung cancer stigma (Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale). As hypothesized, results indicated that good patient-provider communication was associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma (r = -0.18, p < 0.05). These results remained significant, even when controlling for relevant demographic and clinical characteristics (Stan. β = -0.15, p < 0.05). Results indicate that good patient-provider communication is associated with lower levels of lung cancer stigma, suggesting that improving patient-provider communication may be a good intervention target for reducing lung cancer stigma.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 32 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 35 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,148,625
of 23,917,076 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,670
of 4,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,671
of 288,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#45
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,917,076 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 288,639 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.