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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of an online intervention for post-treatment cancer survivors with persistent fatigue
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMJ Open, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011485 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Teresa Corbett, Jane C Walsh, AnnMarie Groarke, Rona Moss-Morris, Brian E McGuire |
| Abstract |
Many post-treatment cancer survivors experience persistent fatigue that can disrupt attempts to resume normal everyday activities after treatment. Theoretical models that aim to explain contributory factors that initiate and sustain fatigue symptoms, or that influence the efficacy of interventions for cancer-related fatigue (CrF) require testing. Adjustment to fatigue is likely to be influenced by coping behaviours that are guided by the representations of the symptom. This paper describes the protocol for a pilot trial of a systematically and theoretically designed online intervention to enable self-management of CrF after cancer treatment. This 2-armed randomised controlled pilot trial will study the feasibility and potential effectiveness of an online intervention. Participants will be allocated to either the online intervention (REFRESH (Recovery from Cancer-Related Fatigue)), or a leaflet comparator. 80 post-treatment cancer survivors will be recruited for the study. An 8-week online intervention based on cognitive-behavioural therapy. The primary outcome is a change in fatigue as measured by the Piper Fatigue Scale (revised). Quality of life will be measured using the Quality of Life in Adult Survivors of Cancer Scale. Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, and at completion of intervention. The feasibility of trial procedures will be tested, as well as the effect of the intervention on the outcomes. This study may lead to the development of a supportive resource to target representations and coping strategies of cancer survivors with CrF post-treatment. Recruitment from general public in Ireland. This trial was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at National University of Ireland Galway in January 2013. Trial results will be communicated in a peer-reviewed journal. ISRCTN55763085; Pre-results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 | 6 | 24% |
| Ireland | 6 | 24% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Vietnam | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 60% |
| Scientists | 6 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 154 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 13% |
| Unknown | 47 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 20% |
| Psychology | 27 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 50 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 08 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,626,768
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#5,147
of 25,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,699
of 360,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#96
of 384 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 360,136 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 384 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.