↓ Skip to main content

What Are the Key Elements of Educational Interventions for Lay Carers of Patients With Advanced Disease? A Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Review of Structural Components, Processes and…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, July 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
What Are the Key Elements of Educational Interventions for Lay Carers of Patients With Advanced Disease? A Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Review of Structural Components, Processes and Modes of Delivery
Published in
Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, July 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.12.341
Pubmed ID
Authors

Morag Farquhar, Clarissa Penfold, Fiona M. Walter, Isla Kuhn, John Benson

Abstract

Educating carers about symptom management may help meet patient and carer needs in relation to distressing symptoms in advanced disease. Reviews of the effectiveness of carer interventions exist but few have focused on educational interventions, and none on the key elements that comprise them but which could inform evidence-based design. To identify the key elements (structural components, processes and delivery-modes) of educational interventions for carers of patients with advanced disease. We systematically searched seven databases, applied inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducted quality appraisal, extracted data, and performed a narrative analysis. Sixty-two included papers related to 49 interventions. Two main delivery-modes were identified: personnel-delivered interventions and standalone resources. Personnel-delivered interventions targeted individuals or groups, the former conducted at single or multiple time points, the latter delivered as series. Just over half targeted carers rather than patient-carer dyads. Most were developed for cancer; few focused purely on symptom management. Standalone resources were rare. Methods to evaluate interventions ranged from post-intervention evaluations to fully-powered randomized controlled trials, but of variable quality. Published evaluations of educational interventions for carers in advanced disease are limited, particularly for non-cancer conditions. Key elements for consideration in developing such interventions were identified, however lack of reporting of reasons for non-participation or dropout from interventions limits understanding of the contribution of these elements to interventions' effectiveness. When developing personnel-delivered interventions for carers in advanced disease, consideration of the disease (and, therefore, caring) trajectory, intervention accessibility (timing, location and transport) and respite provision may be helpful.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Lecturer 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 21 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 20 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 17%
Psychology 12 14%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 24 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 13 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,640,980
of 17,363,630 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain & Symptom Management
#412
of 3,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,708
of 269,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain & Symptom Management
#7
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,363,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 269,800 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.