↓ Skip to main content

Grief and loss for patients before and after heart transplant

Overview of attention for article published in Heart & Lung, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Grief and loss for patients before and after heart transplant
Published in
Heart & Lung, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2016.01.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Poole, Jennifer Ward, Enza DeLuca, Margrit Shildrick, Susan Abbey, Oliver Mauthner, Heather Ross

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine the loss and grief experiences of patients waiting for and living with new hearts. There is much scholarship on loss and grief. Less attention has been paid to these issues in clinical transplantation, and even less on the patient experience. Part of a qualitative inquiry oriented to the work of Merleau-Ponty, a secondary analysis was carried out on audiovisual data from interviews with thirty participants. Patients experience loss and three forms of grief. Pre-transplant patients waiting for transplant experience loss and anticipatory grief related to their own death and the future death of their donor. Transplanted patients experience long-lasting complicated grief with respect to the donor and disenfranchised grief which may not be sanctioned. Loss as well as anticipatory, complicated and disenfranchised grief may have been inadvertently disregarded or downplayed. More research and attention is needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 18 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 22%
Psychology 9 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Philosophy 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Heart & Lung
#683
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,753
of 311,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart & Lung
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 311,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.