↓ Skip to main content

How do nursing home doctors involve patients and next of kin in end-of-life decisions? A qualitative study from Norway

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, January 2016
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
How do nursing home doctors involve patients and next of kin in end-of-life decisions? A qualitative study from Norway
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12910-016-0088-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Romøren, Reidar Pedersen, Reidun Førde

Abstract

Ethically challenging critical events and decisions are common in nursing homes. This paper presents nursing home doctors' descriptions of how they include the patient and next of kin in end-of-life decisions. We performed ten focus groups with 30 nursing home doctors. Advance care planning; aspects of decisions on life-prolonging treatment, and conflict with next of kin were subject to in-depth analysis and condensation. The doctors described large variations in attitudes and practices in all aspects of end-of-life decisions. In conflict situations, many doctors were more concerned about the opinion of next of kin than ensuring the patient's best interest. Many end-of-life decisions appear arbitrary or influenced by factors independent of the individual patient's values and interests and are not based on systematic ethical reflections. To protect patient autonomy in nursing homes, stronger emphasis on legal and ethical knowledge among nursing home doctors is needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 22%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 16 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 February 2016.
All research outputs
#4,602,631
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#452
of 993 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,286
of 395,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 993 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 395,720 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 21 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 71% of its contemporaries.