↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an outcall program to reduce carer burden and depression among carers of cancer patients [PROTECT]: rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an outcall program to reduce carer burden and depression among carers of cancer patients [PROTECT]: rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-14-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia M Livingston, Richard H Osborne, Mari Botti, Cathy Mihalopoulos, Sean McGuigan, Leila Heckel, Kate Gunn, Jacquie Chirgwin, David M Ashley, Melinda Williams

Abstract

Carers provide extended and often unrecognized support to people with cancer. The aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that excessive carer burden is modifiable through a telephone outcall intervention that includes supportive care, information and referral to appropriate psycho-social services. Secondary aims include estimation of changes in psychological health and quality of life. The study will determine whether the intervention reduces unmet needs among patient dyads. A formal economic program will also be conducted.

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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 105 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 24 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 15%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Computer Science 6 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 25 23%
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 2014.
All research outputs
#18,363,356
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,450
of 7,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,794
of 304,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#96
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 304,817 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.