↓ Skip to main content

Providing end-of-life care in general practice: findings of a national GP questionnaire survey

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
Title
Providing end-of-life care in general practice: findings of a national GP questionnaire survey
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, July 2016
DOI 10.3399/bjgp16x686113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Mitchell, Joelle Loew, Catherine Millington-Sanders, Jeremy Dale

Abstract

With increasing numbers of people living with complex life-limiting multimorbidity in the community, consideration must be given to improving the organisation and delivery of high-quality palliative and end-of-life care (EOLC). To provide insight into the experience of GPs providing EOLC in the community, particularly the facilitators and barriers to good-quality care. A web-based national UK questionnaire survey circulated via the Royal College of General Practitioners, NHS, Marie Curie, and Macmillan networks to GPs. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and an inductive thematic analysis. Responses were received from 516 GPs, who were widely distributed in terms of practice location. Of these, 97% felt that general practice plays a key role in the delivery of care to people approaching the end of life and their families. Four interdependent themes emerged from the data: continuity of care - which can be difficult to achieve because of resource concerns including time, staff numbers, increasing primary care workload, and lack of funding; patient and family factors - with challenges including early identification of palliative care needs and recognition of the end of life, opportunity for care planning discussions, and provision of support for families; medical management - including effective symptom-control and access to specialist palliative care services; and expertise and training - the need for training and professional development was recognised to enhance knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards EOLC. The findings reveal enduring priorities for policy, commissioning, practice development, and research in future primary palliative care.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 17%
Researcher 13 9%
Other 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 48 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 16%
Psychology 9 6%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 53 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 06 October 2020.
All research outputs
#810,438
of 23,924,386 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#361
of 4,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,543
of 359,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#14
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,924,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,445 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 359,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.