↓ Skip to main content

Benefits of home-based multidisciplinary exercise and supportive care in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer – protocol for a phase II randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
430 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
Benefits of home-based multidisciplinary exercise and supportive care in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer – protocol for a phase II randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3651-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara Edbrooke, Sanchia Aranda, Catherine L. Granger, Christine F. McDonald, Mei Krishnasamy, Linda Mileshkin, Louis Irving, Sabine Braat, Ross A. Clark, Ian Gordon, Linda Denehy

Abstract

Lung cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers, and is a leading cause of cancer mortality world-wide. Due to lack of early specific symptoms, the majority of patients present with advanced, inoperable disease and five-year relative survival across all stages of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is 14%. People with lung cancer also report higher levels of symptom distress than those with other forms of cancer. Several benefits for survival and patient reported outcomes are reported from physical activity and exercise in other tumour groups. We report the protocol for a study investigating the benefits of exercise, behaviour change and symptom self-management for patients with recently diagnosed, inoperable, NSCLC. This multi-site, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial, powered for superiority, aims to assess functional and patient-reported outcomes of a multi-disciplinary, home-based exercise and supportive care program for people commencing treatment. Ninety-two participants are being recruited from three tertiary-care hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Following baseline testing, participants are randomised using concealed allocation, to receive either: a) 8 weeks of home-based exercise (comprising an individualised endurance and resistance exercise program and behaviour change coaching) and nurse-delivered symptom self-management intervention or b) usual care. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in the change in functional exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance) from baseline to post-program assessment. Secondary outcomes include: objective and self-reported physical activity levels, physical activity self-efficacy, behavioural regulation of motivation to exercise and resilience, muscle strength (quadriceps and grip), health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression and symptom interference. There is a lack of evidence regarding the benefit of exercise intervention for people with NSCLC, particularly in those with inoperable disease receiving treatment. This trial will contribute to evidence currently being generated in national and international trials by implementing and evaluating a home-based program including three components not yet combined in previous research, for people with inoperable NSCLC receiving active treatment and involving longer-term follow-up of outcomes. This trial is ongoing and currently recruiting. This trial was prospectively registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12614001268639 : (4/12/14).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 430 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 430 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 68 16%
Student > Bachelor 53 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 10%
Researcher 28 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 5%
Other 53 12%
Unknown 162 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 83 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 11%
Psychology 33 8%
Sports and Recreations 30 7%
Social Sciences 13 3%
Other 39 9%
Unknown 184 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 23 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,218,923
of 24,746,716 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#709
of 8,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,014
of 326,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#14
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,746,716 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,766 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 326,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.