↓ Skip to main content

Experiences of caregivers of children with inherited metabolic diseases: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 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
Experiences of caregivers of children with inherited metabolic diseases: a qualitative study
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13023-016-0548-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shabnaz Siddiq, Brenda J. Wilson, Ian D. Graham, Monica Lamoureux, Sara D. Khangura, Kylie Tingley, Laure Tessier, Pranesh Chakraborty, Doug Coyle, Sarah Dyack, Jane Gillis, Cheryl Greenberg, Robin Z. Hayeems, Shailly Jain-Ghai, Jonathan B. Kronick, Anne-Marie Laberge, Julian Little, John J. Mitchell, Chitra Prasad, Komudi Siriwardena, Rebecca Sparkes, Kathy N. Speechley, Sylvia Stockler, Yannis Trakadis, Sarah Wafa, Jagdeep Walia, Kumanan Wilson, Nataliya Yuskiv, Beth K. Potter, on behalf of the Canadian Inherited Metabolic Diseases Research Network (CIMDRN)

Abstract

We sought to understand the experiences of parents/caregivers of children with inherited metabolic diseases (IMD) in order to inform strategies for supporting patients and their families. We investigated their experiences regarding the management of disease, its impact on child and family life, and interactions with the health care system. From four Canadian centres, we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with parents/caregivers of children with an IMD who were born between 2006 and 2015 and who were participating in a larger cohort study. Participants were selected with the aim of achieving a diverse sample with respect to treatment centre, IMD, and age of the child. Interviews emphasized the impacts of the disease and its treatment on the child and family and explicitly queried perceptions of interactions with the health care system. We identified emergent themes from the interview data. We completed interviews with 21 parents/caregivers. The 21 children were aged <1 to 7 years old with IMD that included amino acid disorders, urea cycle disorders, fatty acid oxidation disorders, and organic acid disorders or 'other' IMD. Most parents reported that they and their families had adapted well to their child's diagnosis. Parents used proactive coping strategies to integrate complex disease management protocols into routine family life. An important source of stress was concern about the social challenges faced by their children. Participants reported positive interactions with their most involved health care providers within the metabolic clinic. However, they reported challenges associated with the health care system outside of disease-specific metabolic care, when encountering systems and providers unfamiliar with the child's disease. The successful use of proactive coping strategies among parents of children with IMD in this study suggests the potential value of promoting positive coping and is an important direction for future study. Parents' social concerns for their children were important stressors that warrant consideration by health care providers positioned to support families. Our results with respect to experiences with care highlight the important role of specialized metabolic clinics and point to a need for better coordination of the care that takes place outside the disease-specific management of IMD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 153 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 13%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 12 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 6%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 51 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 10%
Psychology 15 10%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 58 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,209,723
of 24,291,750 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#464
of 2,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,282
of 427,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#10
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,291,750 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 427,829 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.