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 |
Systems to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing in people with advanced dementia: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-016-0289-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Domenica Disalvo, Tim Luckett, Meera Agar, Alexandra Bennett, Patricia Mary Davidson |
| Abstract |
Systems for identifying potentially inappropriate medications in older adults are not immediately transferrable to advanced dementia, where the management goal is palliation. The aim of the systematic review was to identify and synthesise published systems and make recommendations for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in advanced dementia. Studies were included if published in a peer-reviewed English language journal and concerned with identifying the appropriateness or otherwise of medications in advanced dementia or dementia and palliative care. The quality of each study was rated using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Synthesis was narrative due to heterogeneity among designs and measures. Medline (OVID), CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 - August 2014) and AMED were searched in October 2014. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included articles were searched manually. Eight studies were included, all of which were scored a high quality using the STROBE checklist. Five studies used the same system developed by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) Program. One study used number of medications as an index, and two studies surveyed health professionals' opinions on appropriateness of specific medications in different clinical scenarios. Future research is needed to develop and validate systems with clinical utility for improving safety and quality of prescribing in advanced dementia. Systems should account for individual clinical context and distinguish between deprescribing and initiation of medications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 20 | 38% |
| Australia | 8 | 15% |
| Spain | 5 | 9% |
| United States | 3 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 57% |
| Scientists | 13 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
| Researcher | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 40 | 27% |
| Unknown | 35 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 24 | 16% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 40 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 20 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,043,280
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#157
of 3,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,371
of 353,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#3
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,649 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 353,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 95% of its contemporaries.