↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Quality of life during early radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer and pain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Quality of life during early radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer and pain
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s138113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Schaller, Elena Dragioti, Gunilla M Liedberg, Britt Larsson

Abstract

Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) have a potentially severe diagnosis and often suffer from tumor-related pain as well as from adverse side effects of treatment such as radiotherapy (RT). Knowledge about quality of life (QoL) during early RT in this group is limited and should be assessed in relation to diagnosis and treatment. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to identify potential factors that may influence QoL in patients with HNC during the early stages of RT (no later than two weeks of ongoing RT). We hypothesized that pain intensity, pain interference, catastrophizing, and mood disturbances are associated with QoL during early RT. In this study, 54 patients (53% of eligible patients) diagnosed with HNC were consecutively recruited from the regular flow to the Pain and Rehabilitation Center at Linköping University. The patients completed self-reported questionnaires on sociodemographics, pain intensity, pain interference, anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, and QoL. The patients in this study scored high for QoL, low for pain intensity, and low for pain interference. The patients reported minor depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms. Regression analyses showed that pain intensity and depressive symptoms negatively influenced QoL. No later than two weeks of RT, pain intensity and depression negatively influenced QoL in patients with HNC. Early screening for pain and depression in a targeted preventive strategy might maintain QoL during the course of the RT for patients with HNC. This assumption needs to be further investigated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 20%
Researcher 5 14%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 14 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,560,904
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,400
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,314
of 314,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#55
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 314,062 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.