ORCID Profile
0000-0002-3987-3007
Current Organisation
University of Newcastle Australia
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 26-12-2023
DOI: 10.1093/NOP/NPAC097
Abstract: Routine cognitive assessment for adults with brain cancers is seldom completed but vital for guiding daily living, maintaining quality of life, or supporting patients and families. This study aims to identify cognitive assessments which are pragmatic and acceptable for use in clinical settings. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched to identify studies published in English between 1990 and 2021. Publications were independently screened by two coders and included if they: (1) were peer-reviewed (2) reported original data relating to adult primary brain tumor or brain metastases (3) used objective or subjective assessments (4) reported assessment acceptability or feasibility. The Psychometric And Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale was used. Consent, assessment commencement and completion, and study completion were extracted along with author-reported acceptability and feasibility data. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021234794. Across 27 studies, 21 cognitive assessments had been assessed for feasibility and acceptability 15 were objective assessments. Acceptability data were limited and heterogeneous, particularly consent (not reported in 23 studies), assessment commencement (not reported in 19 studies), and assessment completion (not reported in 21 studies). Reasons for non-completion could be grouped into patient-factors, assessment-factors, clinician-factors, and system-factors. The three cognitive assessments with the most acceptability and feasibility data reported were the MMSE, MoCA, and NIHTB-CB. Further acceptability and feasibility data are needed including consent, commencement and completion rates. Cost, length, time, and assessor burden are needed for the MMSE, MoCA, and NIHTB-CB, along with potentially new computerized assessments suited for busy clinical settings.
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 16-05-2019
DOI: 10.2196/12473
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 24-12-2019
DOI: 10.1007/S00520-019-05252-8
Abstract: People affected by chronic diseases such as cancer report high levels of distress and a need for psychosocial support. It is unclear whether telephone-based services for people affected by chronic disease are a practical setting for implementing distress screening, referral protocols and rescreening to direct supportive care where it is needed. This systematic review aimed to describe the published literature regarding distress screening and supportive care referral practices in telephone-based services for people affected by chronic diseases such as cancer. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane and Scopus was conducted in February 2018. Included quantitative studies involved: patients or caregivers affected by chronic diseases including cancer and describe a health service assessing psychosocial needs or distress via telephone. Extracted data included the type of cancer or other chronic disease, s le size, screening tool, referral or rescreening protocols, and type of health service. The search identified 3989 potential articles with additional searches returning 30 studies (n = 4019) fourteen were eligible for full-text review. Of the 14 studies, 13 included cancer patients. Studies were across multiple settings and identified nine distress screening tools in use. The reviewed studies indicate that validated distress-screening tools are being used via telephone to identify distress, particularly in relation to cancer. Screening-driven supportive care referrals are also taking place in telephone-based services. However, not all services use an established referral protocol. Ongoing rescreening of callers' distress is also limited despite it being an important recommendation from psycho-oncology guidelines.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 30-08-2023
DOI: 10.1093/NOP/NPAD042
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 20-12-2018
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 24-10-2017
DOI: 10.2196/MENTAL.6707
Abstract: Web-based typed exchanges are increasingly used by professionals to provide emotional support to patients. Although some empirical evidence exists to suggest that various strategies may be used to convey emotion during Web-based text communication, there has been no critical review of these data in patients with chronic conditions. The objective of this review was to identify the techniques used to convey emotion in written or typed Web-based communication and assess the empirical evidence regarding impact on communication and psychological outcomes. An electronic search of databases, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify literature published from 1990 to 2016. Searches were also conducted using Google Scholar, manual searching of reference lists of identified papers and manual searching of tables of contents for selected relevant journals. Data extraction and coding were completed by 2 reviewers (10.00% [573/5731] of screened papers, at abstract/title screening stage 10.0% of screened [69/694] papers, at full-text screening stage). Publications were assessed against the eligibility criteria and excluded if they were duplicates, were not published in English, were published before 1990, referenced animal or nonhuman subjects, did not describe original research, were not journal papers, or did not empirically test the effect of one or more nonverbal communication techniques (for eg, smileys, emoticons, emotional bracketing, voice accentuation, trailers [ellipsis], and pseudowords) as part of Web-based or typed communication on communication-related variables, including message interpretation, social presence, the nature of the interaction (eg, therapeutic alliance), patient perceptions of the interaction (eg, participant satisfaction), or psychological outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and distress. A total of 6902 unique publications were identified. Of these, six publications met the eligibility criteria and were included in a narrative synthesis. All six studies addressed the effect of smileys or emoticons on participant responses, message interpretation, or social presence of the writer. None of these studies specifically targeted chronic conditions. It was found that emoticons were more effective in influencing the emotional impact of a message than no cue and that smileys and emoticons were able to convey a limited amount of emotion. No studies addressed other techniques for conveying emotion in written communication. No studies addressed the effects of any techniques on the nature of the interaction (eg, therapeutic alliance), patient perceptions of the interaction (eg, participant satisfaction), or psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety, or distress). There is a need for greater empirical attention to the effects of the various proposed techniques for conveying emotion in Web-based typed communications to inform health service providers regarding best-practice communication skills in this setting.
No related grants have been discovered for Della Yates.