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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Preferred information sources and needs of cancer patients on disease symptoms and management: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s116463 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Abebe Basazn Mekuria, Daniel Asfaw Erku, Sewunet Admasu Belachew |
| Abstract |
This study aimed at identifying the information needs of cancer patients, their preferences for the means of receiving health information, and the perceived level of satisfaction of existing possibilities for acquiring cancer-related information in Ethiopia. An institutional-based cross-sectional survey was employed on 556 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in the oncology wards of Gondar University Referral Hospital and Tikur Anbesa Specialized Hospital. Data were collected through interviewer-administered questionnaire. The principal information regarded as the most important by the majority of them (67.26%) concerned information on the specific type of cancer (name and stage of cancer), followed by the side effects of chemotherapy and their management (63.29%) and "prognosis (survival)" (51.8%). Doctors were the overwhelming information source about cancer (88.8%), followed by nurses (34%). The majority of respondents (70.3%) were not satisfied at all or satisfied a little, while 15.6% of respondents reported that they were "quite" or "very" satisfied with the existing possibilities for acquiring information regarding cancer. Medical practitioners other than doctors and nurses such as clinical pharmacists should support and identify measures that can enhance patients' satisfaction level regarding the existing possibilities for acquiring information regarding cancer. Periodic assessment of cancer patient's information requirements is also crucial, considering the ever-changing dynamics of priorities of such information desires. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 23 | 37% |
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 08 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,542,912
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#107
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,852
of 348,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#9
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 348,369 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 75 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.