| Title |
Which online format is most effective for assisting Baby Boomers to complete advance directives? A randomised controlled trial of email prompting versus online education module
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Palliative Care, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12904-017-0225-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra L. Bradley, Jennifer J. Tieman, Richard J. Woodman, Paddy A. Phillips |
| Abstract |
Completion of Advance Directives (ADs), being financial and healthcare proxy or instructional documents, is relatively uncommon in Australia. Efforts to increase completion rates include online education and prompting which past literature suggests may be effective. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess computer-based online AD information and email prompting for facilitating completion of ADs by Australian Baby Boomers (b.1946-1965) as well as factors which may impede or assist completion of these documents by this generation when using the online environment. Two hundred eighty-two men and women aged 49-68 years at the time of the trial were randomly assigned to one of 3 intervention groups: education module only; email prompt only; email prompt and education module; and a control group with no education module and no email prompt. The randomized controlled trial was undertaken in participants' location of choice. Randomization and allocation to trial group were carried out by a central computer system. The primary analysis was based on a final total of 189 participants who completed the trial (n = 52 education module only; n = 44 email prompt only; n = 46 email prompt and education module; and n = 47 control). The primary outcome was the number of individuals in any group completing any of the 4 legal ADs in South Australia within 12 months or less from entry into the trial. Frequency analysis was conducted on secondary outcomes such as reasons for non-completion. Mean follow-up post-intervention at 12 months showed that 7% of overall participants completed one or more of the 4 legal ADs but without significant difference between groups (delta = 1%, p = .48 Prompt/Non-Prompt groups, delta = 5%, p = .44 education/non-education groups). Reasons offered for non-completion were too busy (26%) and/or it wasn't the right time (21%). Our results suggest that neither email prompting nor provision of additional educational material online were sufficient to significantly impact AD completion rates for this generational cohort. Research with this cohort over longer periods of time exploring online preferences for engagement with ADs as they age may provide better insight into using this environment for ADs with this group. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000425493 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 33% |
| Canada | 2 | 22% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 44% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,571,119
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#285
of 1,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,785
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,256 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 66% of its contemporaries.