| Title |
Psychosocial interventions for patients with head and neck cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009441.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cherith Semple, Kader Parahoo, Alyson Norman, Eilis McCaughan, Gerry Humphris, Moyra Mills |
| Abstract |
A diagnosis of head and neck cancer, like many other cancers, can lead to significant psychosocial distress. Patients with head and neck cancer can have very specific needs, due to both the location of their disease and the impact of treatment, which can interfere with basic day-to-day activities such as eating, speaking and breathing. There is a lack of clarity on the effectiveness of the interventions developed to address the psychosocial distress experienced by patients living with head and neck cancer. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 411 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 406 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 71 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 54 | 13% |
| Researcher | 45 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 32 | 8% |
| Other | 73 | 18% |
| Unknown | 100 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 103 | 25% |
| Psychology | 88 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 51 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 1% |
| Other | 29 | 7% |
| Unknown | 116 | 28% |
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 14 December 2020.
All research outputs
#4,641,260
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,026
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,872
of 193,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#163
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 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 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 193,994 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.