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 |
Advance care planning: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials conducted with older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maturitas, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.06.016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth Weathers, Rónán O’Caoimh, Nicola Cornally, Carol Fitzgerald, Tara Kearns, Alice Coffey, Edel Daly, Ronan O’Sullivan, Ciara McGlade, D.William Molloy |
| Abstract |
Advance care planning (ACP), involving discussions between patients, families and healthcare professionals on future healthcare decisions, in advance of anticipated impairment in decision-making capacity, improves satisfaction and end-of-life care while respecting patient autonomy. It usually results in the creation of a written advanced care directive (ACD). This systematic review examines the impact of ACP on several outcomes (including symptom management, quality of care and healthcare utilisation) in older adults (>65years) across all healthcare settings. Nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searches of the CINAHL, PubMed and Cochrane databases. A total of 3646 older adults were included (range 72-88 years). Seven studies were conducted with community dwellers and the other two RCTs were conducted in nursing homes. Most studies did not implement a standardised ACD, or measure the impact on quality of end-of-life care or on the death and dying experience. All studies had some risk of bias, with most scoring poorly on the Oxford Quality Scale. While ACP interventions are well received by older adults and generally have positive effects on outcomes, this review highlights the need for well-designed RCTs that examine the economic impact of ACP and its effect on quality of care in nursing homes and other sectors. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Argentina | 1 | 13% |
| Ireland | 1 | 13% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 352 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 350 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 57 | 16% |
| Researcher | 38 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 33 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 9% |
| Other | 86 | 24% |
| Unknown | 68 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 111 | 32% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 78 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 30 | 9% |
| Psychology | 13 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 35 | 10% |
| Unknown | 77 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,760,001
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Maturitas
#698
of 2,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,609
of 368,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maturitas
#17
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 368,659 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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.