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 |
Family meetings in palliative care: Multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Palliative Care, August 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-684x-7-12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Hudson, Karen Quinn, Brendan O'Hanlon, Sanchia Aranda |
| Abstract |
Support for family carers is a core function of palliative care. Family meetings are commonly recommended as a useful way for health care professionals to convey information, discuss goals of care and plan care strategies with patients and family carers. Yet it seems there is insufficient research to demonstrate the utlility of family meetings or the best way to conduct them. This study sought to develop multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines for conducting family meetings in the specialist palliative care setting based on available evidence and consensus based expert opinion. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 224 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 41 | 17% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Other | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 9% |
| Other | 62 | 26% |
| Unknown | 36 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 99 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 8% |
| Psychology | 17 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 7% |
| Unknown | 44 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 March 2023.
All research outputs
#6,652,652
of 24,739,153 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#737
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,273
of 92,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,739,153 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 92,268 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.