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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Oncologists’ perception of depressive symptoms in patients with advanced cancer: accuracy and relational correlates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychology, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40359-015-0063-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lucie Gouveia, Sophie Lelorain, Anne Brédart, Sylvie Dolbeault, Angélique Bonnaud-Antignac, Florence Cousson-Gélie, Serge Sultan |
| Abstract |
Health care providers often inaccurately perceive depression in cancer patients. The principal aim of this study was to examine oncologist-patient agreement on specific depressive symptoms, and to identify potential predictors of accurate detection. 201 adult advanced cancer patients (recruited across four French oncology units) and their oncologists (N = 28) reported depressive symptoms with eight core symptoms from the BDI-SF. Various indices of agreement, as well as logistic regression analyses were employed to analyse data. For individual symptoms, medians for sensitivity and specificity were 33% and 71%, respectively. Sensitivity was lowest for suicidal ideation, self-dislike, guilt, and sense of failure, while specificity was lowest for negative body image, pessimism, and sadness. Indices independent of base rate indicated poor general agreement (median DOR = 1.80; median ICC = .30). This was especially true for symptoms that are more difficult to recognise such as sense of failure, self-dislike and guilt. Depression was detected with a sensitivity of 52% and a specificity of 69%. Distress was detected with a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 65%. Logistic regressions identified compassionate care, quality of relationship, and oncologist self-efficacy as predictors of patient-physician agreement, mainly on the less recognisable symptoms. The results suggest that oncologists have difficulty accurately detecting depressive symptoms. Low levels of accuracy are problematic, considering that oncologists act as an important liaison to psychosocial services. This underlines the importance of using validated screening tests. Simple training focused on psychoeducation and relational skills would also allow for better detection of key depressive symptoms that are difficult to perceive. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Croatia | 1 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 38% |
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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,280,315
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#719
of 776 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,697
of 259,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 776 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 259,157 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.