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 |
Self-report measurement of pain & symptoms in palliative care patients: a comparison of verbal, visual and hand scoring methods in Sub-Saharan Africa
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-014-0118-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Blum, Lucy E Selman, Godfrey Agupio, Thandi Mashao, Keletso Mmoledi, Tony Moll, Natalya Dinat, Liz Gwyther, Lydia Mpanga Sebuyira, Barbara Ikin, Julia Downing, Stein Kaasa, Irene J Higginson, Richard Harding |
| Abstract |
BackgroundDespite a high incidence of life-limiting disease, there is a deficit of palliative care outcome evidence in sub-Saharan Africa. Providers of end of life care call for appropriate measurement tools. The objective is to compare four approaches to self-report pain and symptom measurement among African palliative care patients completing the African Palliative Care Association African Palliative Outcome Scale (APCA African POS).MethodsPatients were recruited from five services (4 in South Africa and 1 in Uganda). Research nurses cross-sectionally administered POS pain and symptom items in local languages. Both questions were scored from 0 to 5 using 4 methods: verbal rating, demonstrating the score using the hand (H), selecting a face on a visual scale (F), and indicating a point on the Jerrycan visual scale (J). H, F and J scores were correlated with verbal scores as reference using Spearman¿s rank and weighted Kappa. A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed.Results315 patients participated (mean age 43.5 years, 69.8% female), 71.1% were HIV positive and 35.6% had cancer, 49.2% lived in rural areas. Spearman¿s rank correlations for pain scores were: H: 0.879, F: 0.823, J: 0.728 (all p¿<¿0.001); for symptoms H: 0.876, F: 0.808, J: 0.721 (all p¿<¿0.001). Weighted Kappa for pain was H: 0.798, F: 0.719 J: 0.548 and for symptoms: H: 0.818, F: 0.718, J: 0.571. There was lower agreement between verbal and both hand and face scoring methods in the Ugandan sample. Compared to the verbal scale the accuracy of predicting high pain/symptoms was H¿>¿F¿>¿J (0.96¿0.89) in ROC analysis.ConclusionsHands and faces scoring methods correlate highly with verbal scoring. The Jerrycan method had only moderate weighted Kappa. POS scores can be reliably measured using hand or face score. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 110 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 23% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 32 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 May 2015.
All research outputs
#7,388,002
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#825
of 2,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,939
of 229,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 229,696 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.