| Title |
Uptake of psychosocial referrals in an outpatient cancer setting: improving service accessibility via the referral process
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-002-0371-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Curry, T. Cossich, J. Matthews, J. Beresford, S. McLachlan |
| Abstract |
The object of this study was to identify factors which influence the uptake of psychosocial services in an ambulatory cancer setting and to identify potential barriers to the access of support services in the referral process. To this end, 202 individuals attending outpatient clinics of a cancer hospital were randomised to the intervention arm of a study to assess the impact of providing co-ordinated, targeted psychosocial referrals and interventions. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the reasons for failure to offer services and for nonacceptance of services was undertaken. Individuals accepted 22% of offered services, refused 38% of offered services, indicated that services were in place in 31% of cases, and were not offered 9% of identified services. The major response from patients refusing services was "not now". Female patients ( P < 0.01), and individuals with a moderate to high level of depression ( P = 0.02), were more likely to accept services. A variety of factors impact on decisions on utilisation of support services. Recommendations on how individuals' access to these services might be improved are offered, based on an analysis of the reasons given by patients for refusal. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 11 | 37% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
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 01 January 2008.
All research outputs
#7,482,726
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,869
of 4,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,128
of 225,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#33
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,592 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 50% 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 225,160 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.