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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Palliative care in the home: a scoping review of study quality, primary outcomes, and thematic component analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Palliative Care, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12904-018-0299-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark Hofmeister, Ally Memedovich, Laura E. Dowsett, Laura Sevick, Tamara McCarron, Eldon Spackman, Tania Stafinski, Devidas Menon, Tom Noseworthy, Fiona Clement |
| Abstract |
The aim of palliative care is to improve the quality of life of patients and families through the prevention and relief of suffering. Frequently, patients may choose to receive palliative care in the home. The objective of this paper is to summarize the quality and primary outcomes measured within the palliative care in the home literature. This will synthesize the current state of the literature and inform future work. A scoping review was completed using PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EconLit, PsycINFO, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database were searched from inception to August 2016. Inclusion criteria included: 1) care was provided in the "home of the patient" as defined by the study, 2) outcomes were reported, and 3) reported original data. Thematic component analysis was completed to categorize interventions. Fifty-three studies formed the final data set. The literature varied extensively. Five themes were identified: accessibility of healthcare, caregiver support, individualized patient centered care, multidisciplinary care provision, and quality improvement. Primary outcomes were resource use, symptom burden, quality of life, satisfaction, caregiver distress, place of death, cost analysis, or described experiences. The majority of studies were of moderate or unclear quality. There is robust literature of varying quality, assessing different components of palliative care in the home interventions, and measuring different outcomes. To be meaningful to patients, these interventions need to be consistently evaluated with outcomes that matter to patients. Future research could focus on reaching a consensus for outcomes to evaluate palliative care in the home interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 5 | 19% |
| Spain | 4 | 15% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| Colombia | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 15% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 157 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 17% |
| Unknown | 59 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 19% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 66 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,850,276
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#154
of 1,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,565
of 348,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#15
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 348,412 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 72% of its contemporaries.