↓ Skip to main content

The availability and effectiveness of tools supporting shared decision making in metastatic breast cancer care: a review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
The availability and effectiveness of tools supporting shared decision making in metastatic breast cancer care: a review
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12904-018-0330-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Inge Spronk, Jako S. Burgers, François G. Schellevis, Liesbeth M. van Vliet, Joke C. Korevaar

Abstract

Shared decision-making (SDM) in the management of metastatic breast cancer care is associated with positive patient outcomes. In daily clinical practice, however, SDM is not fully integrated yet. Initiatives to improve the implementation of SDM would be helpful. The aim of this review was to assess the availability and effectiveness of tools supporting SDM in metastatic breast cancer care. Literature databases were systematically searched for articles published since 2006 focusing on the development or evaluation of tools to improve information-provision and to support decision-making in metastatic breast cancer care. Internet searches and experts identified additional tools. Data from included tools were extracted and the evaluation of tools was appraised using the GRADE grading system. The literature search yielded five instruments. In addition, two tools were identified via internet searches and consultation of experts. Four tools were specifically developed for supporting SDM in metastatic breast cancer, the other three tools focused on metastatic cancer in general. Tools were mainly applicable across the care process, and usable for decisions on supportive care with or without chemotherapy. All tools were designed for patients to be used before a consultation with the physician. Effects on patient outcomes were generally weakly positive although most tools were not studied in well-designed studies. Despite its recognized importance, only two tools were positively evaluated on effectiveness and are available to support patients with metastatic breast cancer in SDM. These tools show promising results in pilot studies and focus on different aspects of care. However, their effectiveness should be confirmed in well-designed studies before implementation in clinical practice. Innovation and development of SDM tools targeting clinicians as well as patients during a clinical encounter is recommended.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 16%
Computer Science 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 12 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 12 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,323,409
of 14,513,034 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#298
of 664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,476
of 276,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,513,034 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 276,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them