↓ Skip to main content

Complementary and conventional providers in cancer care: experience of communication with patients and steps to improve communication with other providers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Complementary and conventional providers in cancer care: experience of communication with patients and steps to improve communication with other providers
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12906-017-1814-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Trine Stub, Sara A. Quandt, Thomas A. Arcury, Joanne C. Sandberg, Agnete E. Kristoffersen

Abstract

Effective interdisciplinary communication is important to achieve better quality in health care. The aims of this study were to compare conventional and complementary providers' experience of communication about complementary therapies and conventional medicine with their cancer patients, and to investigate how they experience interdisciplinary communication and cooperation. This study analyzed data from a self-administrated questionnaire. A total of 606 different health care providers, from four counties in Norway, completed the questionnaire. The survey was developed to describe aspects of the communication pattern among oncology doctors, nurses, family physicians and complementary therapists (acupuncturists, massage therapists and reflexologists/zone-therapists). Between-group differences were analyzed using chi-square, ANOVA and Fisher's exact tests. Significance level was defined as p < 0.05 without adjustment for multiple comparisons. Conventional providers and complementary therapists had different patterns of communication with their cancer patients regarding complementary therapies. While complementary therapists advised their patients to apply both complementary and conventional modalities, medical doctors were less supportive of their patients' use of complementary therapies. Of conventional providers, nurses expressed more positive attitudes toward complementary therapies. Opportunities to improve communication between conventional and complementary providers were most strongly supported by complementary providers and nurses; medical doctors were less supportive of such attempts. A number of doctors showed lack of respect for complementary therapists, but asked for more research, guidelines for complementary modalities and training in conventional medicine for complementary therapists. For better quality of care, greater communication about complementary therapy use is needed between cancer patients and their conventional and complementary providers. In addition, more communication between conventional and complementary providers is needed. Nurses may have a crucial role in facilitating communication, as they are positive toward complementary therapies and they have more direct communication with patients about their treatment preferences.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 27%
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Unspecified 6 18%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 24%
Unspecified 7 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 8 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 October 2017.
All research outputs
#3,316,843
of 12,050,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#700
of 2,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,494
of 272,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#6
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,050,803 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 2,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 272,609 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 74% of its contemporaries.