↓ Skip to main content

Persistent inequalities in Hospice at Home provision

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , February 2018
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
44 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Persistent inequalities in Hospice at Home provision
Published in
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care , February 2018
DOI 10.1136/bmjspcare-2017-001367
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jackie Buck, Liz Webb, Lorraine Moth, Lynn Morgan, Stephen Barclay

Abstract

To describe the nature and scope of a new Hospice at Home (H@H) service and to identify its equality of provision. Case note review of patients supported by a H@H service for 1 year from September 2012 to August 2013 (n=321). Descriptive analysis to report frequencies and proportions of quantitative data extracted from service logs, referral forms and care records; thematic analysis of qualitative data from care record free text. Demand outstripped supply. Twice as many night care episodes were requested (n=1237) as were provided (n=613). Inequalities in access to the service related to underlying diagnosis and socioeconomic status. 75% of patients using the service had cancer (221/293 with documented diagnosis). Of those who died at home in the areas surrounding the hospice, 53% (163/311) of people with cancer and 11% (49/431) of those without cancer received H@H support. People who received H@H care were often more affluent than the population average for the area within which they lived. Roles of the service identified included: care planning/implementation, specialist end-of-life care assessment and advice, 'holding' complex patients until hospice beds become available and clinical nursing care. There is significant unmet need and potentially large latent demand for the H@H service. People without cancer or of lower socioeconomic status are less likely to access the service. Action is needed to ensure greater and more equitable service provision in this and similar services nationally and internationally.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 33%
Student > Master 2 13%
Unspecified 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 27%
Unspecified 3 20%
Social Sciences 3 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 02 March 2018.
All research outputs
#509,894
of 13,786,654 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#51
of 1,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,037
of 401,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
#5
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,786,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,038 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 401,617 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 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.