↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of general practice end-of-life symptom control

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 919)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
65 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Systematic review of general practice end-of-life symptom control
Published in
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , January 2018
DOI 10.1136/bmjspcare-2017-001374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geoffrey K Mitchell, Hugh E Senior, Claire E Johnson, Julia Fallon-Ferguson, Briony Williams, Leanne Monterosso, Joel J Rhee, Peta McVey, Matthew P Grant, Michèle Aubin, Harriet TG Nwachukwu, Patsy M Yates

Abstract

End of life care (EoLC) is a fundamental role of general practice, which will become more important as the population ages. It is essential that general practice's role and performance of at the end of life is understood in order to maximise the skills of the entire workforce. To provide a comprehensive description of the role and performance of general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) in EoLC symptom control. Systematic literature review of papers from 2000 to 2017 were sought from Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases. From 6209 journal articles, 46 papers reported GP performance in symptom management. There was no reference to the performance of GPNs in any paper identified. Most GPs expressed confidence in identifying EoLC symptoms. However, they reported lack of confidence in providing EoLC at the beginning of their careers, and improvements with time in practice. They perceived emotional support as being the most important aspect of EoLC that they provide, but there were barriers to its provision. GPs felt most comfortable treating pain, and least confident with dyspnoea and depression. Observed pain management was sometimes not optimal. More formal training, particularly in the use of opioids was considered important to improve management of both pain and dyspnoea. It is essential that GPs receive regular education and training, and exposure to EoLC from an early stage in their careers to ensure skill and confidence. Research into the role of GPNs in symptom control needs to occur.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 18%
Lecturer 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Unspecified 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 9 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Psychology 5 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 18%
Unspecified 2 9%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#326,217
of 12,492,295 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#25
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,209
of 340,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#5
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,492,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 340,932 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.