| Title |
How do doctors refer to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) in oncology consultations?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-012-0218-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanne Greenhalgh, Purva Abhyankar, Serena McCluskey, Elena Takeuchi, Galina Velikova |
| Abstract |
We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of consultations between oncologists and their patients to explore how patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data were referred to in the process of (1) eliciting and exploring patients' concerns; (2) making decisions about supportive treatment and (3) making decisions about chemotherapy and other systemic treatments. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 67% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 20% |
| Researcher | 22 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 15% |
| Unknown | 33 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 30% |
| Psychology | 23 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 9% |
| Unknown | 37 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 14 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,077,711
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#363
of 2,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,485
of 147,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,839 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 147,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.