↓ Skip to main content

Psychopathological Aspects in Childhood Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT): The Perception of Parents and Adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Psychopathological Aspects in Childhood Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT): The Perception of Parents and Adolescents
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvia Zanato, Annalisa Traverso, Marta Tremolada, Francesco Sinatora, Alessio Porreca, Giorgio Pozziani, Nicoletta Di Florio, Fabia Capello, Antonio Marzollo, Manuela Tumino, Chiara Cattelan, Giuseppe Basso, Chiara Messina

Abstract

Background: Data about psychosocial sequelae of childhood Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) are limited and the association with a specific donor type or other medical factors is largely unknown (Chang et al., 2012). The aim of the present study was to compare the psychological aspects of pediatric HSCT survivors with healthy peers. A secondary aim was to detect whether parents and children differed in the perception of mental health status. The influence of medical factors on psychological status was also examined. Method: Thirty seven HSCT survivors (23 males) with a mean age of 14.4 years (SD = 3.03; range 8.16-18.33) were recruited. Twenty-six patients underwent an allogenic HSCT (matched unrelated donor, n = 20; matched sibling donor, n = 6) and 11 patients received an autologous HSCT. The children psychological aspects were assessed using the Youth Self Report (YSR) (Achenbach and Rescorla, 2001) and compared to a group of matched healthy peers. At the same time, parents were requested to complete the Child Behavior Checklist 6-18 (Achenbach and Rescorla, 2001). Medical and socio-demographic data were also collected. Results: HSCT survivors reported significantly higher levels of somatic complains (t27 = 3.14; p = 0.004; mean = 3.1) when compared to healthy peers (mean = 1.5). The parent CBCL scores on "child total competence" exceeded the normative clinical cutoff in 48.6% cases. Inter-rater agreement between parent and patient reports was present only in three scales: total competence score (K = 0.06, p = 0.002), somatic complaints (K = 0.21, p = 0.003) and attention problems (k = 0.13; p = 0.02). According to Ancova models, internalizing problems were more frequent in HSCT from family donors (F2 = 3.13; p = 0.06) or in the presence of acute complications (F1 = 11.95; p = 0.003). Conclusion: In contrast to the perception of parents, pediatric HSCT survivors reported good psychological health. However, they complained about more somatic problems as compared with healthy peers. Medical aspects such as donor source and the presence of acute complications should be taken into consideration for the psychological approach in order to improve pediatric HSCT survivor care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Engineering 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 15 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,412,387
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,302
of 30,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,833
of 309,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#497
of 553 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 309,562 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 553 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.