↓ Skip to main content

A Delphi study to develop indicators of cancer patient experience for quality improvement

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
A Delphi study to develop indicators of cancer patient experience for quality improvement
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-3823-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn E. Williams, Janet Sansoni, Darcy Morris, Cristina Thompson

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop prioritised indicators to measure cancer patient experience and thus guide quality improvement in the delivery of patient care. A Delphi study, consisting of two surveys and three workshops, was employed to gather expert opinions on the most important indicators to measure. Survey participants were 149 health professionals, academics/technical experts and consumers. The first survey was based on a literature review which identified 105 elements of care within 14 domains of patient experience. These were rated on a 7-point Likert scale, with '1' representing high importance. Elements with mean ratings between 1.0 and 2.0 were retained for the second survey. The 43 least-important elements were omitted, four elements were revised and nine new elements added. Consensus was defined as at least 70% of participants rating an element '1' or '2'. Multivariate and cluster analyses were used to develop 20 draft indicators, which were presented to 51 experts to refine and prioritise at the three workshops. All elements in the second survey were rated '1' or '2' by 81% of participants. Workshop participants agreed strongly on the four most important indicators: coordinated care, access to care, timeliness of the first treatment, and communication. Other indicators considered highly important were follow-up care for survivors; timeliness of diagnosis; information relating to side effects, pain and medication; comprehensibility of information provided to patients; and needs assessment. Experts identified priorities with a high level of consensus, providing a rigorous foundation for developing prioritised indicators of quality in cancer patient experience.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 19%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 19 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,673,538
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,602
of 4,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,727
of 313,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#36
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 313,301 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.