| Title |
Improving national hospice/palliative care service symptom outcomes systematically through point-of-care data collection, structured feedback and benchmarking
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-014-2351-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David C. Currow, Samuel Allingham, Patsy Yates, Claire Johnson, Katherine Clark, Kathy Eagar |
| Abstract |
Every health care sector including hospice/palliative care needs to systematically improve services using patient-defined outcomes. Data from the national Australian Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration aims to define whether hospice/palliative care patients' outcomes and the consistency of these outcomes have improved in the last 3 years. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 14% |
| Researcher | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 41 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Psychology | 6 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 48 | 34% |
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 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,800,946
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#1,911
of 4,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,054
of 234,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#23
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 234,103 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 70% of its contemporaries.