↓ Skip to main content

Medical and moral considerations regarding complex medical decisions in older patients with multimorbidity: a compact deliberation framework

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Medical and moral considerations regarding complex medical decisions in older patients with multimorbidity: a compact deliberation framework
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0707-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen F. A. M. Janssens, Susanne J. de Kort, Wilco P. Achterberg, Susan Kurrle, Ngaire Kerse, Ian D. Cameron, Dorothea P. Touwen

Abstract

In health care for older adults, patients with multimorbidity usually receive the same interventions as those patients without multimorbidity. However, standard curative or life-sustaining treatment options have to be considered carefully in view of the maximally attainable result in older and frail patients. To guide such complex medical decisions, we present a compact deliberation framework that could assist physician(s) in charge of the medical treatment of a specific elderly patient to systematize his own thinking about treatment and decisional responsibilities, in case of an intercurrent disease.The framework includes four questions to be addressed when deciding on a single urgent standard curative or life-sustaining intervention in acute medical problems of an elderly patient with multimorbidity: 1) What is known about the patient's aims and preferences? 2) Will the intervention be effective? 3) Will the intervention support the aims and preferences of the patient? 4) In view of the aims and preferences, will the risks and benefits be in balance?If all four considerations are answered favorably, the intervention will fit patient-centered and appropriate care for frail older patients with multimorbidity.Application to a patient case illustrates how our framework can improve the quality of the shared decision-making process in care for older people and helps clarify medical and moral considerations regarding how to appropriately treat the individual patient.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 14%
Unspecified 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 24%
Unspecified 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 22 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 11 July 2023.
All research outputs
#4,610,325
of 25,123,616 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,235
of 3,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,848
of 453,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#37
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,123,616 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,565 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 453,113 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.