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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A qualitative evidence synthesis of healthcare professionals’ experiences and views of palliative care for patients with a haematological malignancy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Cancer Care, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1111/ecc.13316 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maura Dowling, Paul Fahy, Catherine Houghton, Mike Smalle |
| Abstract |
Patients with haematological malignancies may not be receiving appropriate referrals to palliative care and continuing to have treatments in the end stages of their disease. This systematic review of qualitative research aimed to synthesise healthcare professionals' (HCPs) views and experiences of palliative care for adult patients with a haematologic malignancy. A systematic search strategy was undertaken across eight databases. Thomas and Harden's approach to thematic analysis guided synthesis on the seventeen included studies. GRADE-GRADEQual guided assessment of confidence in the synthesised findings. Three analytic themes were identified: (a) "Maybe we can pull another 'rabbit out of the hat'," represents doctors' therapeutic optimism, (b) "To tell or not to tell?" explores doctors' decision-making around introducing palliative care, and (c) "Hospice, home or hospital?" describes HCPs concerns about challenges faced by haematology patients at end of life in terms of transfusion support and risk of catastrophic bleeds. Haematologists value the importance of integrated palliative care but prefer the term "supportive care." Early integration of supportive care alongside active curative treatment should be the model of choice in haematology settings in order to achieve the best outcomes and improved quality of life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 7 | 47% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 35 | 56% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 35 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 19 September 2020.
All research outputs
#3,175,295
of 24,597,084 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cancer Care
#140
of 1,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,055
of 406,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cancer Care
#2
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,597,084 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,301 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 406,453 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.