↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of the Family Caregivers Who Did Not Benefit From a Successful Psychoeducational Group Intervention During Palliative Cancer Care

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer nursing (Online), January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Characteristics of the Family Caregivers Who Did Not Benefit From a Successful Psychoeducational Group Intervention During Palliative Cancer Care
Published in
Cancer nursing (Online), January 2017
DOI 10.1097/ncc.0000000000000351
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maja Holm, Kristofer Årestedt, Ida Carlander, Yvonne Wengström, Joakim Öhlen, Anette Alvariza

Abstract

Although there has been a steady increase in intervention studies aimed toward supporting family caregivers in palliative cancer care, they often report modest effect sizes and there is a lack of knowledge about possible barriers to intervention effectiveness. The aim of this study is to explore the characteristics of family caregivers who did not benefit from a successful psychoeducational group intervention compared with the characteristics of those who did. A psychoeducational intervention for family caregivers was delivered at 10 palliative settings in Sweden. Questionnaires were used to collect data at baseline and following the intervention. The Preparedness for Caregiving Scale was the main outcome for the study and was used to decide whether or not the family caregiver had benefited from the intervention (Preparedness for Caregiving Scale difference score ≤ 0 vs ≥ 1). A total of 82 family caregivers completed the intervention and follow-up. Caregivers who did not benefit from the intervention had significantly higher ratings of their preparedness and competence for caregiving and their health at baseline compared with the group who benefited. They also experienced lower levels of environmental burden and a trend toward fewer symptoms of depression. Family caregivers who did not benefit from the intervention tended to be less vulnerable at baseline. Hence, the potential to improve their ratings was smaller than for the group who did benefit. Determining family caregivers in cancer and palliative care who are more likely to benefit from an intervention needs to be explored further in research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Researcher 15 13%
Other 5 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 41 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 29 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 16%
Psychology 17 15%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Computer Science 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 42 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 August 2017.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cancer nursing (Online)
#929
of 1,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304,503
of 421,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer nursing (Online)
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,532 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 421,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.