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 |
The feasibility and benefit of a brief psychosocial intervention in addition to early palliative care in patients with advanced cancer to reduce depressive symptoms: a pilot randomized controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-017-3560-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thamires Monteiro do Carmo, Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro Paiva, Cleyton Zanardo de Oliveira, Maria Salete de Angelis Nascimento, Carlos Eduardo Paiva |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and potential benefit of a brief psychosocial intervention based on cognitive-behavioral therapy performed in addition to early palliative care (PC) in the reduction of depressive symptoms among patients with advanced cancer. An open-label randomized phase II clinical trial with two intervention arms and one control group. Patients with advanced cancer starting palliative chemotherapy and who met the selection criteria were included. The participants were randomly allocated to three arms: arm A, five weekly sessions of psychosocial intervention combined with early PC; arm B, early PC only; and arm C, standard cancer treatment. Feasibility was investigated by calculating rates (%) of inclusion, attrition, and contamination (% of patients from Arm C that received PC). Scores of depression (primary aim), anxiety, and quality of life were measured at baseline and 45, 90, 120, and 180 days after randomization. From the total of 613 screened patients (10.3% inclusion rate), 19, 22, and 22 patients were allocated to arms A, B, and C, respectively. Contamination and attrition rates (180 days) were 31.8% and 38.0%, respectively. No interaction between the arms and treatments were found. Regarding effect sizes, there was a moderate benefit in arm A over arms B and C in emotional functioning (-0.66 and -0.61, respectively) but a negative effect of arm A over arm C in depression (-0.74). Future studies to be conducted with this population group need to revise the eligibility criteria and make them less restrictive. In addition, the need for arm C is questioned due to high contamination rate. The designed psychosocial intervention was not able to reduce depressive symptoms when combined with early PC. Further studies are warrant to evaluate the intervention on-demand and in subgroups of high risk of anxiety/depression. Clinical Trials identifier NCT02133274 . Registered May 6, 2014. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 27% |
| Belgium | 1 | 9% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Comoros | 1 | 9% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 36% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 36% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 178 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 9% |
| Researcher | 12 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 21% |
| Unknown | 69 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 16% |
| Psychology | 19 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 9 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 74 | 42% |
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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,793,662
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,242
of 8,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,573
of 318,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#23
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,440 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 318,102 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.