↓ Skip to main content

Strategies for effective goals of care discussions and decision-making: perspectives from a multi-centre survey of Canadian hospital-based healthcare providers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Strategies for effective goals of care discussions and decision-making: perspectives from a multi-centre survey of Canadian hospital-based healthcare providers
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12904-015-0035-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda L. Roze des Ordons, Nishan Sharma, Daren K. Heyland, John J. You

Abstract

Communication gaps impact the quality of patient care. Previous research has focused on communication barriers rather than seeking solutions. Our aim was to identify strategies for effective communication and decision-making about goals of care for medical interventions in serious illness, from the perspectives of hospital-based healthcare providers. A cross-sectional survey composed of closed- and open-ended questions about goals of care communication and decision-making was administered to healthcare providers in 13 centres in six Canadian provinces. We analyzed a portion of the open-ended survey questions, specifically (1) suggestions for overcoming barriers encountered in discussing goals of care, and (2) currently effective practices. Thematic content analysis was used to analyze responses to the open-ended questions. Of the 1,256 respondents to the larger survey, 468 responded to the open-ended questions (37 %), including 272 of 512 nurses (53 %), 153 of 484 internal medicine trainees (32 %), and 43 of 260 attending physicians (17 %). Responses to each of the two questions were similar, generating a common set of themes and subthemes. Effective strategies and ideas for improving communication and decision-making about goals of care clustered under five themes: patient and family factors, communication between healthcare providers and patients, interprofessional collaboration, education, and resources. Subthemes highlighted core elements of shared decision-making. Translating our findings into multifaceted interventions that consider patient and family factors, address knowledge gaps, optimize resource utilization, and facilitate communication and collaboration between patients, families and healthcare providers may improve communication and decision-making about goals of care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 18%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 33 25%
Unknown 29 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 23%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Psychology 8 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 40 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,789,834
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#751
of 1,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,308
of 266,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 266,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 66% of its contemporaries.