↓ Skip to main content

Interactive Versus Passive Distraction and Parent Psychoeducation as Pain Management Techniques During Pediatric Venepuncture

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical journal of pain, November 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Interactive Versus Passive Distraction and Parent Psychoeducation as Pain Management Techniques During Pediatric Venepuncture
Published in
Clinical journal of pain, November 2018
DOI 10.1097/ajp.0000000000000628
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Newell, Jennifer Keane, Brian E McGuire, Caroline Heary, Vincent McDarby, Bernie Dudley, Josh Moran, Kady Francis, Line Caes

Abstract

The aim of the current research was to compare the relative efficacy of interactive and passive distraction, with or without parental psychoeducation, on child pain and distress during a venepuncture. We also compared the effect of parental psychoeducation on parental distress, knowledge of distraction strategies and engagement in distraction. This cross-sectional study included 213 children scheduled for a venepuncture, and one of their parents, who were randomly allocated to one of four conditions; interactive distraction, passive distraction, interactive distraction with parent psychoeducation and passive distraction with parent psychoeducation. ANCOVA's were used to investigate the impact of distraction type and the use of parent psychoeducation on child and parent pain related outcome variables. Statistical analyses revealed no significant differences between groups for child-reported pain and distress. The parents of children who received interactive distraction reported significantly higher levels of distress than the parents of children who received passive distraction. Parents who received parent psychoeducation had a significantly higher level of knowledge than parents who did not receive psychoeducation, but did not engage in more effective pain management behaviour. The results indicated that distraction type did not have a significantly different influence on child pain-related outcome variables. In addition, while psychoeducation was demonstrated to be effective in increasing parental knowledge, it was not sufficient to change parental behaviour.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Unspecified 2 4%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 11 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,083,782
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical journal of pain
#424
of 2,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,617
of 363,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical journal of pain
#7
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 363,432 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.