↓ Skip to main content

Routine screening of Indigenous cancer patients’ unmet support needs: a qualitative study of patient and clinician attitudes

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Routine screening of Indigenous cancer patients’ unmet support needs: a qualitative study of patient and clinician attitudes
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12939-016-0380-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

B. Thewes, E. Davis, A. Girgis, P. C. Valery, K. Giam, A. Hocking, J. Jackson, V. Yf He, D. Yip, G. Garvey

Abstract

Indigenous Australians have poorer cancer outcomes in terms of incidence mortality and survival compared with non-Indigenous Australians. The factors contributing to this disparity are complex. Identifying and addressing the psychosocial factors and support needs of Indigenous cancer patients may help reduce this disparity. The Supportive Care Needs Assessment Tool for Indigenous People (SCNAT-IP) is a validated 26-item questionnaire developed to assess their unmet supportive care needs. This qualitative study reports on patient and clinician attitudes towards feasibility and acceptability of SCNAT-IP in routine care. Forty-four in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 clinical staff and 34 Indigenous cancer patients with heterogeneous tumours. Participants were recruited from four geographically diverse Australian cancer clinics. Transcripts were imported into qualitative analysis software (NVivo 10 Software), coded and thematic analysis performed. Indigenous patients (mean age 54.4 years) found the SCNAT-IP beneficial and easy to understand and they felt valued and heard. Clinical staff reported multiple benefits of using the SCNAT-IP. They particularly appreciated its comprehensive and systematic nature as well as the associated opportunities for early intervention. Some staff described improvements in team communication, while both staff and patients reported that new referrals to support services were directly triggered by completion of the SCNAT-IP. There were also inter-cultural benefits, with a positive and bi-directional exchange of information and cultural knowledge reported when using the SCNAT-IP. Although staff identified some potential barriers to using the SCNAT-IP, including the time required, the response format and comprehension difficulties amongst some participants with low English fluency, these were outweighed by the benefits. Some areas for scaled improvement were also identified by staff. Staff and patients found the SCNAT-IP to be an acceptable tool and supported universal screening for Indigenous cancer patients. The SCNAT-IP has the potential to help reduce the inequalities in cancer care experienced by Indigenous Australians by identifying and subsequently addressing their unmet support needs. Further research is needed to explore the validity of the SCNAT-IP for Indigenous people from other nations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 24 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Psychology 11 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Unspecified 5 6%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 25 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,955,306
of 24,849,927 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,106
of 2,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,024
of 352,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#26
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,849,927 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 352,479 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.