↓ Skip to main content

Health care professionals’ experience, understanding and perception of need of advanced cancer patients with cachexia and their families: The benefits of a dedicated clinic

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Health care professionals’ experience, understanding and perception of need of advanced cancer patients with cachexia and their families: The benefits of a dedicated clinic
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12904-016-0171-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Scott, Joanne Reid, Peter Hudson, Peter Martin, Sam Porter

Abstract

Cachexia is defined as the on-going loss of skeletal muscle mass that cannot be fully reversed by conventional nutritional support. It is found in up to 80% of patients with advanced cancer and has profound psycho-social consequences for patients and their families. Previous studies demonstrate that many healthcare professionals receive little formal education in cachexia management leading them to feel that they have limited understanding of the syndrome and cannot intervene effectively. This study aims to examine the value of a dedicated cachexia clinic and its influence on staff understanding and practice. An exploratory qualitative study was conducted. The study employed semi-structured interviews with a range of healthcare professionals responsible for designing and delivering cancer care in a large teaching hospital in Australia. This hospital had a dedicated cachexia clinic. In-depth interviews were conducted with 8 healthcare professionals and senior managers. Four themes were identified: formal and informal education; knowledge and understanding; truth telling in cachexia and palliative care; and, a multi-disciplinary approach. Findings show that improved knowledge and understanding across a staff body can lead to enhanced staff confidence and a willingness to address cancer cachexia and its consequences with patients and their families. Comparisons with similar previous research demonstrate the advantages of providing a structure for staff to gain knowledge about cachexia and how this can contribute to feelings of improved understanding and confidence necessary to respond to the challenge of cachexia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Postgraduate 9 11%
Other 8 10%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 23 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 24%
Psychology 8 10%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 27 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#1,241
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,278
of 426,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#18
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 426,107 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.