| Title |
The Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying: what went wrong?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp13x673559 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Knights, Diana Wood, Stephen Barclay |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 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 | 18 | 25% |
| United States | 4 | 6% |
| Ireland | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Serbia | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 43 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 67 | 93% |
| Scientists | 2 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 57 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 65. 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 17 April 2024.
All research outputs
#668,057
of 25,768,270 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#279
of 4,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,499
of 220,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#3
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,768,270 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,936 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 220,826 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 93% of its contemporaries.