↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study of health care professionals’ views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, July 2018
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
A qualitative study of health care professionals’ views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12904-018-0347-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barbara A. Jack, Tracy K. Mitchell, Mary R. O’Brien, Sergio A. Silverio, Katherine Knighting

Abstract

Good end-of-life care planning is vital to ensure optimal care is provided for patients and their families. Two key factors are open and honest advance care planning conversations between the patient (where possible), family, and health care professionals, focusing on exploring what their future wishes are; and the development of an advance care plan document. However, in paediatric and neonatal settings, there has been little research to demonstrate how advance care planning conversations take place. This study explored health care professionals' views and experiences of paediatric advance care planning in hospitals, community settings and hospices. A qualitative methodology was employed using purposive sampling of health care professionals involved in the end-of-life care for children aged 0-18 years known to the hospital palliative care team, and had died at least three months before, but less than 18 months prior to the study. Ethics committee approval was obtained for the study. Located in the North of England, the study involved three hospitals, a children's hospice, and community services. Data were collected using semi-structured, digitally recorded, telephone interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis. Twenty-one health care professionals participated, including generalist paediatric staff as well as specialist palliative care staff. Two themes were generated from the study: The timing of planning conversations, including waiting for the relationship with the family to form; the introduction of parallel planning; avoiding a crisis situation. Secondly, supporting effective conversations around advance care planning, including where to have the conversation; introducing the conversation; and how to approach the topic encompassing the value of advance care planning and documentation for families. The timing of when to start the advance care planning conversations remains an issue for health care professionals. The value of doing it in stages and considering the environment where the conversations are held was noted. Timely planning was seen as vital to avoid difficult conversations at a crisis point and for co-ordination of care. Good advance care planning is to provide the best person-centred care for the child and experience for the family.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 16%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 7 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 44 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 21 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 17%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Psychology 7 6%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 46 42%
Attention Score in Context

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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#2,618,781
of 23,322,258 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#289
of 1,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,253
of 327,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,258 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 1,270 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 327,691 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.