↓ Skip to main content

“It wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be”: a qualitative study of early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients after treatment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
“It wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be”: a qualitative study of early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients after treatment
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2956-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara E. Golden, Charles R. Thomas, Mark E. Deffebach, Mithran S. Sukumar, Paul H. Schipper, Brandon H. Tieu, Andrew Y. Kee, Andrew C. Tsen, Christopher G. Slatore, For the Early Stage Lung Cancer Comparative Effectiveness Research Consortium

Abstract

While surgical resection is recommended for most patients with early stage lung cancer, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being increasingly utilized. Provider-patient communication regarding risks/benefits of each approach may be a modifiable factor leading to improved patient-centered outcomes. Our objective was to determine a framework and recommended strategies on how to best communicate with patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the post-treatment setting. We qualitatively evaluated the experiences of 11 patients with early clinical stage NSCLC after treatment, with a focus on treatment experience, knowledge obtained, communication, and recommendations. We used conventional content analysis and a patient-centered communication theoretical model to guide our understanding. Five patients received surgery and six received SBRT. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated. Few participants reported communication deficits around receiving follow-up information, although several had remaining questions about their treatment outcome (mainly those who underwent SBRT). They described feeling anxious regarding their first surveillance CT scan and clinician visit. Overall, participants remained satisfied with care because of implicit trust in their clinicians rather than explicit communication. Communication gaps remain but may be addressed by a trusting relationship with the clinician. Patients recommend clinicians give thorough explanations and personalize when possible.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 14 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 17 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,830,418
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,069
of 4,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,724
of 437,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#36
of 175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,276 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 437,716 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 175 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.