↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of implementing a dyadic psychoeducational intervention for cancer patients and family caregivers

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Effectiveness of implementing a dyadic psychoeducational intervention for cancer patients and family caregivers
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-3758-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marita G. Titler, Moira A. Visovatti, Clayton Shuman, Katrina R. Ellis, Tanima Banerjee, Bonnie Dockham, Olga Yakusheva, Laurel Northouse

Abstract

This study examined the effectiveness, feasibility, and satisfaction with implementation of the FOCUS program in two US Cancer Support Community affiliates in Ohio and California as well as the cost to deliver the program. FOCUS is an evidence-based psychoeducational intervention for dyads (cancer patients and caregivers). A pre-post-intervention design was employed. Eleven, five-session Focus programs were delivered by licensed professionals in a small group format (three-four dyads/group) to 36 patient-caregiver dyads. An Implementation Training Manual, a FOCUS Intervention Protocol Manual, and weekly conference calls were used to foster implementation. Participants completed questionnaires prior to and following completion of each five-session FOCUS program to measure primary (emotional distress, quality of life) and secondary outcomes (benefits of illness, self-efficacy, and dyadic communication). Enrollment and retention rates and fidelity to FOCUS were used to measure feasibility. Cost estimates were based on time and median hourly wages. Repeated analysis of variance was used to analyze the effect of FOCUS on outcomes for dyads. Descriptive statistics were used to examine feasibility, satisfaction, and cost estimates. FOCUS had positive effects on QOL (p = .014), emotional (p = .012), and functional (p = .049) well-being, emotional distress (p = .002), benefits of illness (p = .013), and self-efficacy (p = .001). Intervention fidelity was 85% with enrollment and retention rates of 71.4 and 90%, respectively. Participants were highly satisfied. Cost for oversight and delivery of the five-session FOCUS program was $168.00 per dyad. FOCUS is an economic and effective intervention to decrease distress and improve the quality of life for dyads.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 32%
Psychology 11 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 38 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,941,384
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,992
of 4,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,777
of 317,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#50
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 317,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.