↓ Skip to main content

Rationale of the BREAst cancer e-healTH [BREATH] multicentre randomised controlled trial: An Internet-based self-management intervention to foster adjustment after curative breast cancer by…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
305 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
Rationale of the BREAst cancer e-healTH [BREATH] multicentre randomised controlled trial: An Internet-based self-management intervention to foster adjustment after curative breast cancer by decreasing distress and increasing empowerment
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-12-394
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanne W van den Berg, Marieke F M Gielissen, Petronella B Ottevanger, Judith B Prins

Abstract

After completion of curative breast cancer treatment, patients go through a transition from patient to survivor. During this re-entry phase, patients are faced with a broad range of re-entry topics, concerning physical and emotional recovery, returning to work and fear of recurrence. Standard and easy-accessible care to facilitate this transition is lacking. In order to facilitate adjustment for all breast cancer patients after primary treatment, the BREATH intervention is aimed at 1) decreasing psychological distress, and 2) increasing empowerment, defined as patients' intra- and interpersonal strengths.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 305 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 299 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 15%
Researcher 43 14%
Student > Master 35 11%
Student > Bachelor 29 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Other 63 21%
Unknown 66 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 78 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 13%
Social Sciences 12 4%
Computer Science 8 3%
Other 43 14%
Unknown 76 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2013.
All research outputs
#13,135,772
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,824
of 8,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,032
of 169,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#42
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,245 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 169,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 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 57% of its contemporaries.