↓ Skip to main content

McMaster University

Assessing Palliative Care Content in Dementia Care Guidelines: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
35 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 Mendeley
Title
Assessing Palliative Care Content in Dementia Care Guidelines: A Systematic Review
Published in
Journal of Pain & Symptom Management, January 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.10.368
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pamela Durepos, Abigail Wickson-Griffiths, Afeez Abiola Hazzan, Sharon Kaasalainen, Vasilia Vastis, Lisa Battistella, Alexandra Papaioannou

Abstract

Families of persons with dementia continue to report unmet needs during end-of-life. Strategies to improve care and quality of life for persons with dementia include development of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and an integrative palliative approach. We aimed to assess palliative care content in dementia CPGs in order to identify the presence or limitations of recommendations and discussion pertaining to common issues or domains affected by illness as described by the Canadian Hospice Palliative Care 'Square of Care'. A systematic review of databases and grey literature was conducted for recent CPGs. Guidelines meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) instrument. Quality CPGs were analyzed through organizational template analysis using illness domains described by the 'Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association Model'. The study protocol is registered at PROSPERO (CRD 42015025369). Eleven CPGs were selected and analyzed from 3779 citations. Nine guidelines demonstrated the maximum level of content regarding physical, psychological and social care. Conversely, spiritual care was either absent (three) or minimal (three) in CPGs. Six CPGs did not address loss or grief and seven CPGs did not address or had minimal content regarding end-of-life (EOL) care. The lack of content surrounding grief represents a gap for this population at high-risk for complicated grief and chronic sorrow. Results of this review require attention by CPG developers and researchers to development of evidence-based recommendations surrounding spiritual care, EOL and grief.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 217 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 19%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Other 15 7%
Researcher 14 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 6%
Other 41 19%
Unknown 70 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 19%
Psychology 12 6%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Computer Science 3 1%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 77 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 24 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,435,739
of 25,410,626 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain & Symptom Management
#270
of 4,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,225
of 422,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain & Symptom Management
#8
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,410,626 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,065 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 422,133 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 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 90% of its contemporaries.