↓ Skip to main content

The effect of weekly specialist palliative care teleconsultations in patients with advanced cancer –a randomized clinical trial

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
178 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
The effect of weekly specialist palliative care teleconsultations in patients with advanced cancer –a randomized clinical trial
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12916-017-0866-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick D. Hoek, Henk J. Schers, Ewald M. Bronkhorst, Kris C. P. Vissers, Jeroen G. J. Hasselaar

Abstract

Teleconsultation seems to be a promising intervention for providing palliative care to home-dwelling patients; however, its effect on clinically relevant outcome measures remains largely unexplored. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether weekly teleconsultations from a hospital-based specialist palliative care consultation team (SPCT) improved patient-experienced symptom burden compared to "care as usual". Secondary objectives were to determine the effects of these teleconsultations on unmet palliative care needs, continuity of care, hospital admissions, satisfaction with teleconsultations, and the burden experienced by informal caregivers. Seventy-four home-dwelling patients diagnosed with advanced cancer were recruited from outpatient clinics of a tertiary university hospital and from regional home care organizations between May 2011 and January 2015. Participants were randomized to receive weekly, prescheduled teleconsultations with an SPCT-member (intervention group), or to receive "care as usual" (control group), for a period of 12 weeks. The primary outcome of this study was: patient-experienced symptom burden indicated by the following: (1) Total Distress Score (defined as the sum of all nine subscales of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System) and (2) the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Mixed models were used to test for differences between the two groups. The Total Distress Score became significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group, reaching significance at week 12 (adjusted difference at week 12: 6.90 points, 95% CI, 0.17 to 13.63; P = 0.04). The adjusted anxiety scores were higher in the intervention group than in the control group (estimate effect: 1.40; 95% CI, 0.14 to 2.55; P = 0.03). No difference was found between the groups in adjusted depression scores (estimate effect: 0.30; 95% CI, -1.39 to 1.99; P = 0.73) or in secondary outcome measures. Adding weekly teleconsultations to usual palliative care leads to worse reported symptom scores among home-dwelling patients with advanced cancer. Possible explanations for these findings include excess attention on symptoms and (potential) suffering, the supply-driven care model for teleconsultations used in this trial, and the already high level of specialist palliative care provided to the control group in this study. "The Netherlands National Trial Register", NTR2817 , prospectively registered: March 21, 2011.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 178 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 20%
Student > Bachelor 22 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Researcher 12 7%
Other 34 19%
Unknown 43 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 50 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 44 25%
Psychology 16 9%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 48 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#2,240,122
of 16,669,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,451
of 2,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,967
of 272,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,669,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 272,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them