↓ Skip to main content

UK quality statements on end of life care in dementia: a systematic review of research evidence

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, October 2015
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
UK quality statements on end of life care in dementia: a systematic review of research evidence
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12904-015-0047-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bridget Candy, Margaret Elliott, Kirsten Moore, Victoria Vickerstaff, Elizabeth Sampson, Louise Jones

Abstract

Globally, the number of people who die with dementia is increasing. The importance of a palliative approach in the care of people with dementia is recognised and there are national polices to enhance current care. In the UK implementation of these polices is promoted by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Dementia Quality Standards (QS). Since publication of the QS new care interventions have been developed. To explore critically the current international research evidence on effect available to inform NICE Dementia QS relevant to end of life (EOL) care. We used systematic review methods to seek the research evidence for three statements within the Dementia QS. These are those that recommend: (1) a case management approach, (2) discussing and consideration of making a statement about future care (SFC) and (3) a palliative care assessment (PCA). We included evaluative studies of relevant interventions that used a comparative design, such as trials and cohort studies, and measured EOL care outcomes for persons dying with moderate to severe dementia. Our primary outcome of interest was whether the intervention led to a measurable impact on wellbeing for the person with dementia and their family. We assessed included studies for quality using a scale by Higginson and colleagues (2002) for assessment of quality of studies in palliative care, and two authors undertook key review processes. Data sources included Cinahl, Embase, and PsychINFO from 2001 to August 2014. Our search strategy included free text and medical subject headings relevant to population and recommended care. We found seven studies evaluating a care intervention; four assessed SFC, three PCA. None assessed case management. Studies were of weak design; all used retrospective data and relied on others for precise record keeping and for accurate recall of events. There was limited overlap in outcome measurements. Overall reported benefits were mixed. Quality statements relevant to EOL care are useful to advance practice however they have a limited evidence base. High quality empirical work is needed to establish that the recommendations in these statements are best practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Researcher 18 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Other 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 16%
Social Sciences 15 13%
Psychology 14 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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
#3,118,100
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#359
of 1,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,071
of 295,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#4
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 295,466 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.