E-technology is increasingly used in oncology to obtain self-reported symptom assessment information from patients, although its potential to provide a clinical monitoring tool in palliative care is relatively unexplored in the UK. This study aimed to evaluate the support provided to lung cancer patients post palliative radiotherapy using a computerized assessment tool and to determine the clinical acceptability of the tool in a palliative care setting. However, of the 17 clinicians identified as managing patients who met the initial eligibility criteria for the study, only one clinician gave approval for their patient to be contacted regarding participation, therefore the benefits of this novel technology could not be assessed. Thirteen key clinicians from the centres involved in the study were subsequently interviewed. They acknowledged potential benefits of incorporating computerized patient assessment from both a patient and practice perspective, but emphasized the importance of clinical intuition over standardized assessment. Although clinicians were positive about palliative care patients participating in research, they felt that this population of patients were normally too old, with too rapidly deteriorating a condition to participate in a study using e-technology. In order to encourage acceptance of e-technology within palliative care, emphasis is needed on actively promoting the contribution of technologies with the potential to improve patient outcomes and the patient experience.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 October 2011.
All research outputs
#14,719,073
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Palliative Medicine
#1,858
of 1,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,551
of 108,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Palliative Medicine
#20
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 108,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
