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 |
Cost-utility and biological underpinnings of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) versus a psychoeducational programme (FibroQoL) for fibromyalgia: a 12-month randomised controlled trial (EUDAIMON study)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12906-016-1068-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Albert Feliu-Soler, Xavier Borràs, María T. Peñarrubia-María, Antoni Rozadilla-Sacanell, Francesco D’Amico, Rona Moss-Morris, Matthew A. Howard, Nicolás Fayed, Carles Soriano-Mas, Marta Puebla-Guedea, Antoni Serrano-Blanco, Adrián Pérez-Aranda, Raffaele Tuccillo, Juan V. Luciano |
| Abstract |
The EUDAIMON study focuses on fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), a prevalent chronic condition characterized by pain, fatigue, cognitive problems and distress. According to recent reviews and meta-analyses, Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is a promising therapeutic approach for patients with FMS. The measurement of biomarkers as part of the analysis of MBSR effects would help to identify the neurobiological underpinnings of MBSR and increase our knowledge of FMS pathophysiology. The main objectives of this 12-month RCT are: firstly, to examine the effectiveness and cost-utility for FMS patients of MBSR as an add-on to treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU + the psychoeducational programme FibroQoL, and versus TAU only; secondly, to examine pre-post differences in brain structure and function, as well as levels of specific inflammatory markers in the three study arms and; thirdly, to analyse the role of some psychological variables as mediators of 12-month clinical outcomes. Effectiveness, cost-utility, and neurobiological analyses performed alongside a 12-month RCT. The participants will be 180 adult patients with FMS recruited at the Sant Joan de Déu hospital (St. Boi de Llobregat, Spain), randomly allocated to one of the three study arms: TAU + MBSR vs. TAU + FibroQol vs. TAU. A comprehensive assessment to collect functional, quality of life, distress, costs, and psychological variables will be conducted pre-, post-intervention, and at 12-month post-intervention. Fifty per cent of study participants will be evaluated at pre- and post-treatment using Voxel-Based Morphometry, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, pseudo-continuous Arterial Spin Labeling, and resting state fMRI. A cytokine multiplex kit of high-sensitivity will be applied (cytokines IL-6, IL-8, IL-10 + high-sensitivity CRP test). The findings obtained from this RCT will indicate whether MBSR is potentially cost-effective for FMS and contribute to knowledge of any brain and inflammatory changes associated with MBSR in FMS patients. Specifically, we will determine whether there are morphometric and functional changes associated with participation in MBSR in brain regions related to meta-awareness, body awareness, memory consolidation-reconsolidation, emotion regulation and in networks postulated to underpin the sensory-discriminative, cognitive-evaluative and affective-motivational aspects of the pain experience. NCT02561416 . Registered 23 September 2015. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 38% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
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 519 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 517 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 85 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 62 | 12% |
| Researcher | 50 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 38 | 7% |
| Other | 78 | 15% |
| Unknown | 156 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 125 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 61 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 30 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 2% |
| Other | 47 | 9% |
| Unknown | 178 | 34% |
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 22 July 2019.
All research outputs
#5,403,968
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#889
of 3,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,924
of 297,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#17
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 297,542 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 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.