↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for supporting informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of a disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2011
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
189 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
349 Mendeley
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Interventions for supporting informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of a disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007617.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bridget Candy, Louise Jones, Robyn Drake, Baptiste Leurent, Michael King

Abstract

Patients in the terminal phase of a disease may have complex needs. It is often family and friends who play a central role in providing support, despite health professional input and regardless of whether the patient is at home or elsewhere. Such informal caring may involve considerable physical, psychological, and economic stresses. A range of supportive programmes for caregivers is being developed including psychological support and practical assistance.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 349 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
United States 3 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 335 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 67 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 18%
Student > Bachelor 48 14%
Researcher 38 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 10%
Other 58 17%
Unknown 39 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 121 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 18%
Psychology 57 16%
Social Sciences 15 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 2%
Other 28 8%
Unknown 56 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 16 May 2017.
All research outputs
#622,621
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,939
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,484
of 69,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 69,196 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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.