↓ Skip to main content

Palliative pharmacological sedation for terminally ill adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
144 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Palliative pharmacological sedation for terminally ill adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010206.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elaine M Beller, Mieke L van Driel, Leanne McGregor, Shani Truong, Geoffrey Mitchell

Abstract

Terminally ill people experience a variety of symptoms in the last hours and days of life, including delirium, agitation, anxiety, terminal restlessness, dyspnoea, pain, vomiting, and psychological and physical distress. In the terminal phase of life, these symptoms may become refractory, and unable to be controlled by supportive and palliative therapies specifically targeted to these symptoms. Palliative sedation therapy is one potential solution to providing relief from these refractory symptoms. Sedation in terminally ill people is intended to provide relief from refractory symptoms that are not controlled by other methods. Sedative drugs such as benzodiazepines are titrated to achieve the desired level of sedation; the level of sedation can be easily maintained and the effect is reversible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 144 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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Unknown 157 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 21%
Researcher 26 16%
Unspecified 21 13%
Other 15 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 55 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 19%
Unspecified 26 16%
Social Sciences 10 6%
Psychology 10 6%
Other 15 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 90. 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 27 January 2018.
All research outputs
#159,122
of 12,550,112 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#391
of 10,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,031
of 285,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#15
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,550,112 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,353 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 285,552 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 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 94% of its contemporaries.