↓ Skip to main content

Clinical practice guidelines of the French Association for Supportive Care in Cancer and the French Society for Psycho-oncology: refusal of treatment by adults afflicted with cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Clinical practice guidelines of the French Association for Supportive Care in Cancer and the French Society for Psycho-oncology: refusal of treatment by adults afflicted with cancer
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-3762-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. C. Faivre, V. Adam, V. Block, M. Metzger, J. Salleron, S. Dauchy

Abstract

The study's purpose was to develop practical guidelines for assessment and management of refusal of treatment by adults afflicted with cancer. The French Association for Supportive Care in Cancer and the French Society for Psycho-oncology gathered a task force that applied a consensus methodology to draft guidelines studied predisposing situations, the diagnosis, regulatory aspects, and the management of refusal of treatment by adults afflicted with cancer. We propose five guidelines: (1) be aware of the conditions/profiles of patients most often associated with refusal of treatment so as to adequately underpin the care and support measures; (2) understand the complexity of the process of refusal and knowing how to accurately identify the type and the modalities of the refused treatments; (3) apply a way to systematically analyze refusal, thereby promoting progression from a situation of disaccord toward a consensual decision; (4) devise procedures, according to the legal context, to address refusal of treatment that safeguards the stakeholders in situations of sustained disaccord; and (5) know the indications for ethical collective decision-making. The quality of the relationship between patients and health professionals, and the communication between them are essential components involved in reaching a point of consent or refusal of treatment. A process of systematic analysis of refusal is recommended as the only way to ensure that all of the physiological, psychological, and contextual elements that are potentially involved are taken into account.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 9 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Psychology 3 13%
Computer Science 3 13%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,646,150
of 24,801,176 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,561
of 4,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,549
of 322,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#32
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,801,176 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 322,401 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 63% of its contemporaries.