↓ Skip to main content

Priorities for global research into children’s palliative care: results of an International Delphi Study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 Mendeley
Title
Priorities for global research into children’s palliative care: results of an International Delphi Study
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12904-015-0031-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Downing, Caprice Knapp, Mary Ann Muckaden, Susan Fowler-Kerry, Joan Marston, on behalf of the ICPCN Scientific Committee

Abstract

There is an urgent need to develop an evidence base for children's palliative care (CPC) globally, and in particular in resource-limited settings. Whilst the volume of CPC research has increased in the last decade, it has not been focused on countries where the burden of disease is highest. For example, a review of CPC literature in sub Saharan Africa (SSA) found only five peer-reviewed papers on CPC. This lack of evidence is not confined to SSA, but can be seen globally in specific areas, such as an insufficient research and evidence base on the treatment of pain and other symptoms in children. This need for an evidence base for CPC has been recognised for some time, however without understanding the priorities for research in CPC organisations, many struggle with how to allocate scarce resources to research. The International Children's Palliative Care Network (ICPCN) undertook a Delphi study between October 2012 and February 2013 in order to identify the global research priorities for CPC. Members of the ICPCN Scientific Committee formed a project working group and were asked to suggest areas of research that they considered to be important. The list of 70 areas for research was put through two rounds of the Delphi process via a web-based questionnaire. ICPCN members and affiliated stakeholders (n = 153 from round 1 and n = 95 from round 2) completed the survey. Participants from SSA were the second largest group of respondents (28.1 % round 1, 24.2 % round 2) followed by Europe. A list of 26 research areas reached consensus. The top five priorities were: Children's understanding of death and dying; Managing pain in children where there is no morphine; Funding; Training; and Assessment of the WHO two-step analgesic ladder for pain management in children. Information from this study is important for policy makers, educators, advocates, funding agencies, and governments. Priorities for research pertinent to CPC throughout the world have been identified. This provides a much needed starting place for the allocation of funds and building research infrastructure. Researchers working in CPC are in a unique position to collaborate and produce the evidence that is needed.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 132 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 14 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 20%
Psychology 13 10%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Philosophy 2 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 46 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 11 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,085,324
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#217
of 1,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,609
of 264,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,250 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 82% 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 264,230 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.