↓ Skip to main content

Study protocol for Enhancing Parenting In Cancer (EPIC): development and evaluation of a brief psycho-educational intervention to support parents with cancer who have young children

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Study protocol for Enhancing Parenting In Cancer (EPIC): development and evaluation of a brief psycho-educational intervention to support parents with cancer who have young children
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40814-017-0215-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lesley Stafford, Michelle Sinclair, Jane Turner, Louise Newman, Claire Wakefield, Mei Krishnasamy, G. Bruce Mann, Leslie Gilham, Kylie Mason, Paula Rauch, Julia Cannell, Penelope Schofield

Abstract

Parents with cancer have high rates of psychological morbidity, and their children are at risk of poor psychosocial outcomes, particularly in the context of parental distress and poor family communication. Parents express concerns about the impact of cancer on their children and report a lack of professional guidance in meeting their children's needs. Few parenting interventions exist and current interventions have extensive infrastructure demands making them unsuitable for routine use in most health settings. The aims of this study are to develop and establish the feasibility and acceptability of a novel and accessible psycho-educational intervention to improve parenting efficacy and decrease parental stress among adults with cancer who have children aged 3-12 years. The intervention will be suitable for parents with cancer who are receiving treatment with a view to longer term survival, irrespective of cancer diagnosis, and their respective co-parents. This study comprises two phases using the UK Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions. In the development phase, intervention content will be iteratively developed and evaluated in consultation with consumers, and in the piloting phase, feasibility will be tested in a clinical sample of 20 parents with cancer and their co-parents using a single arm, pre-test post-test design. The intervention will comprise an audiovisual resource (DVD), a question prompt list, and a telephone call with a clinical psychologist. Questionnaires administered pre- and 1 month post-intervention will assess parental stress, psychological morbidity, quality of life, self-efficacy and perceptions of child adjustment, and family functioning. Intervention feasibility will be determined by mixed-method participant evaluation of perceived usefulness, benefits, and acceptability. This new initiative will translate existing descriptive evidence into an accessible intervention that supports parenting during cancer treatment and meets the information needs of parents with cancer and their families. This is an important advance: despite increasing recognition of the impact of parental cancer on the family, intervention research lags behind the descriptive literature. This low-intensity, accessible, and targeted intervention places minimal burden on infrastructure and promotes patient autonomy and self-management. If feasible, this style of intervention may be a template for future interventions with similar populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 35 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 23%
Psychology 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 34 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,204,503
of 24,932,492 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#387
of 1,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,841
of 451,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#15
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,932,492 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 451,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.