↓ Skip to main content

Going back to home to die: does it make a difference to patient survival?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, March 2015
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
29 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Going back to home to die: does it make a difference to patient survival?
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12904-015-0003-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nozomu Murakami, Kouichi Tanabe, Tatsuya Morita, Shinichi Kadoya, Masanari Shimada, Kaname Ishiguro, Naoki Endo, Koichiro Sawada, Yasunaga Fujikawa, Rumi Takashima, Yoko Amemiya, Hiroyuki Iida, Shiro Koseki, Hatsuna Yasuda, Tatsuhiko Kashii

Abstract

Many patients wish to stay at home during the terminal stage of cancer. However, there is concern that medical care provided at home may negatively affect survival. This study therefore explored whether the survival duration differed between cancer patients who received inpatient care and those who received home care. We retrospectively investigated the place of care/death and survival duration of 190 cancer patients after their referral to a palliative care consultation team in a Japanese general hospital between 2007 and 2012. The patients were classified into a hospital care group consisting of those who received palliative care in the hospital until death, and a home care group including patients who received palliative care at home from doctors in collaboration with the palliative care consultation team. Details of the place of care, survival duration, and patient characteristics (primary site, gender, age, history of chemotherapy, and performance status) were obtained from electronic medical records, and analyzed after propensity score matching in the place of care. Median survival adjusted for propensity score was significantly longer in the home care group (67.0 days, n = 69) than in the hospital care group (33.0 days, n = 69; P = 0.0013). Cox's proportional hazard analysis revealed that the place of care was a significant factor for survival following adjustment for covariates including performance status. This study suggests that the general concern that home care shortens the survival duration of patients is not based on evidence. A cohort study including more known prognostic factors is necessary to confirm the results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 59 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Other 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,366,491
of 24,694,993 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#87
of 1,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,556
of 268,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#3
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,694,993 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 1,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 268,669 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 16 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.