↓ Skip to main content

Follow-up care after treatment for prostate cancer: protocol for an evaluation of a nurse-led supported self-management and remote surveillance programme

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Follow-up care after treatment for prostate cancer: protocol for an evaluation of a nurse-led supported self-management and remote surveillance programme
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3643-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane Frankland, Hazel Brodie, Deborah Cooke, Claire Foster, Rebecca Foster, Heather Gage, Jake Jordan, Ines Mesa-Eguiagaray, Ruth Pickering, Alison Richardson

Abstract

As more men survive a diagnosis of prostate cancer, alternative models of follow-up care that address men's enduring unmet needs and are economical to deliver are needed. This paper describes the protocol for an ongoing evaluation of a nurse-led supported self-management and remote surveillance programme implemented within the secondary care setting. The evaluation is taking place within a real clinical setting, comparing the outcomes of men enrolled in the Programme with the outcomes of a pre-service change cohort of men, using a repeated measures design. Men are followed up at four and 8 months post recruitment on a number of outcomes, including quality of life, unmet need, psychological wellbeing and activation for self-management. An embedded health economic analysis and qualitative evaluation of implementation processes are being undertaken. The evaluation will provide important information regarding the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and implementation of an integrated supported self-management follow-up care pathway within secondary care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 22%
Psychology 8 15%
Computer Science 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 19 35%

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 24 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,505,133
of 20,275,020 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,497
of 7,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,052
of 293,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,275,020 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,263 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 293,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them