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 |
Hope-based interventions in chronic disease: an integrative review in the light of Nightingale
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, January 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0034-7167-2020-0283 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos António Laranjeira, Ana Isabel Fernandes Querido, Zaida Borges Charepe, Maria Dos Anjos Coelho Rodrigues Dixe |
| Abstract |
To identify the available evidence in the scientific literature about the strategies or interventions used to promote hope in people with chronic diseases. An integrative literature review of literature published between 2009-2019, which was conducted in online browsers/databases: b-On, EBSCO, PubMed, Medline, ISI, SciELO, PsycINFO, Google Scholar. Forty-one studies were found, of which eight met the inclusion criteria. Most studies used a quantitative approach. There was a predominance of studies from Asia and America, addressing patients with multiple sclerosis, diabetes, congestive heart failure, and cancer. Hope-based interventions were categorized by the hope attributes: experiential process, spiritual/transcendence process, rational thought process, and relational process. Hope-based interventions, in its essence, are good clinical practices in the physical, psychological, social and spiritual domains. This is congruent with the vision of nursing, first proposed by Florence Nightingale. There seem to be gaps in the literature regarding specific hope promoting interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 26 | 58% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 29 | 64% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 December 2020.
All research outputs
#5,343,131
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#54
of 738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,039
of 473,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem
#11
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 738 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 473,401 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.