↓ Skip to main content

Health care use and costs at the end of life: a comparison of elderly Australian decedents with and without a cancer history

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, June 2017
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 (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Health care use and costs at the end of life: a comparison of elderly Australian decedents with and without a cancer history
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12904-017-0213-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Reeve, Preeyaporn Srasuebkul, Julia M. Langton, Marion Haas, Rosalie Viney, Sallie-Anne Pearson, On behalf of the EOL-CC study authors

Abstract

There is limited population-level research on end-of-life care in Australia that considers health care use and costs across hospital and community sectors. The aim of this study was to quantify health care use and costs in the last 6 months of life in a cohort of elderly Australian decedents and to examine the factors associated with end-of-life resource use and costs. A retrospective cohort study using routinely collected health data from Australian Government Department of Veterans' Affairs clients. The study included two cohorts of elderly Australians who died between 2005 and 2009; one cohort with a recorded cancer diagnosis and a comparison cohort with no evidence of a cancer history. We examined hospitalisations, emergency department (ED) visits, prescription drugs, clinician visits, pathology, and procedures and associated costs in the last 6 months of life. We used negative binominal regression to explore factors associated with health service use and costs. The cancer cohort had significantly higher rates of health service use and 27% higher total health care costs than the comparison cohort; in both cohorts, costs were driven primarily by hospitalisations. Older age was associated with lower costs and those who died in residential aged care incurred half the costs of those who died in hospital. The results suggest differences in end-of-life care pathways dependent on patient factors, with younger, community-dwelling patients and those with a history of cancer incurring significantly greater costs. There is a need to examine whether the investment in end-of-life care meets patient and societal needs.

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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Lecturer 7 7%
Other 24 23%
Unknown 32 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 36 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 03 August 2017.
All research outputs
#5,827,517
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#647
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,130
of 318,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#14
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 318,785 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.