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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Efficacy of a hypnosis-based intervention to improve well-being during cancer: a comparison between prostate and breast cancer patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-018-4607-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Grégoire, H. Nicolas, I. Bragard, F. Delevallez, I. Merckaert, D. Razavi, D. Waltregny, M.-E. Faymonville, A. Vanhaudenhuyse |
| Abstract |
Prostate and breast cancer can have a lot of negative consequences such as fatigue, sleep difficulties and emotional distress, which decrease quality of life. Group interventions showed benefits to emotional distress and fatigue, but most of these studies focus on breast cancer patients. However, it is important to test if an effective intervention for breast cancer patients could also have benefits for prostate cancer patients. Our controlled study aimed to compare the efficacy of a self-hypnosis/self-care group intervention to improve emotional distress, sleep difficulties, fatigue and quality of life of breast and prostate cancer patients. 25 men with prostate cancer and 68 women with breast cancer participated and were evaluated before (T0) and after (T1) the intervention. After the intervention, the breast cancer group showed positive effects for anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep difficulties, and global health status, whereas there was no effect in the prostate cancer group. We showed that women suffered from higher difficulties prior to the intervention and that their oncological treatments were different in comparison to men. The differences in the efficacy of the intervention could be explained by the baseline differences. As men in our sample reported few distress, fatigue or sleep problems, it is likely that they did not improve on these dimensions. ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02569294 and NCT03423927 ). Retrospectively registered in October 2015 and February 2018 respectively. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 146 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Researcher | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 12% |
| Unknown | 62 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 13% |
| Psychology | 17 | 12% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 9% |
| Unknown | 66 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 26 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,257,391
of 25,773,273 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#165
of 9,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,307
of 343,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#3
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,773,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,092 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 343,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 153 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.