↓ Skip to main content

Experience-based design, co-design and experience-based co-design in palliative and end-of-life care

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , February 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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
22 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
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.
Title
Experience-based design, co-design and experience-based co-design in palliative and end-of-life care
Published in
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , February 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjspcare-2016-001117
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erica Borgstrom, Stephen Barclay

Abstract

Experience-based design, co-design, and experience-based co-design can be used within healthcare to design services that improve the patient, carer and staff experience of the services. As palliative and end-of-life care centrally value person-centred care, we believe that service designers, commissioners and those tasked with making quality improvements will be interested in this growing field. This paper outlines these approaches-with a particular emphasis on experience-based co-design-and describes how they are and can be used within palliative and end-of-life care. Based on a rapid review and several case studies, this article highlights the key lessons learnt from previous projects using these approaches and discusses areas for improvement in current reporting of service design projects.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Student > Master 3 15%
Unspecified 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 25%
Unspecified 4 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 15%
Design 3 15%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Other 3 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 05 April 2017.
All research outputs
#518,385
of 9,541,169 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#67
of 806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,363
of 255,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,541,169 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 806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. 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 255,377 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.