↓ Skip to main content

End-of-life decisions and practices for very preterm infants in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation of Belgium

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, June 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 (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
End-of-life decisions and practices for very preterm infants in the Wallonia-Brussels Federation of Belgium
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1168-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabelle Aujoulat, Séverine Henrard, Anne Charon, Anne-Britt Johansson, Jean-Paul Langhendries, Anne Mostaert, Danièle Vermeylen, Gaston Verellen

Abstract

Very preterm birth (24 to < 32 week's gestation) is a major public health issue due to its prevalence, the clinical and ethical questions it raises and the associated costs. It raises two major clinical and ethical dilemma: (i) during the perinatal period, whether or not to actively manage a baby born very prematurely and (ii) during the postnatal period, whether or not to continue a curative treatment plan initiated at birth. The Wallonia-Brussels Federation in Belgium counts 11 neonatal intensive care units. An inventory of key practices was compiled on the basis of an online questionnaire that was sent to the 65 neonatologists working in these units. The questionnaire investigated care-related decisions and practices during the antenatal, perinatal and postnatal periods, as well as personal opinions on the possibility of standardising and/or legislating for end-of-life decisions and practices. The participation rate was 89% (n = 58). The results show a high level of homogeneity pointing to overall agreement on the main principles governing curative practice and the gestational age that can be actively managed given the current state of knowledge. There was, however, greater diversity regarding principles governing the transition to end-of-life care, as well as opinions about the need for a common protocol or law to govern such practices. Our results reflect the uncertainty inherent in the complex and diverse situations that are encountered in this extreme area of clinical practice, and call for qualitative research and expert debates to further document and make recommendations for best practices regarding several "gray zones" of end-of-life care in neonatology, so that high quality palliative care may be granted to all neonates concerned with end-of-life decisions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 26%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 16%
Psychology 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 14 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 21 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,155,923
of 14,533,169 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#356
of 1,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,851
of 275,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,533,169 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,828 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 275,393 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 78% 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