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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Variation in guideline adherence in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma care: impact of patient and hospital characteristics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-015-1547-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jozette J.C. Stienen, Rosella P.M.G. Hermens, Lianne Wennekes, Saskia A.M. van de Schans, Richard W.M. van der Maazen, Helena M. Dekker, Janine Liefers, Johan H.J.M. van Krieken, Nicole M.A. Blijlevens, Petronella B. Ottevanger, On behalf of the PEARL study group |
| Abstract |
The objective of this observational study was to assess the influence of patient, tumor, professional and hospital related characteristics on hospital variation concerning guideline adherence in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) care. Validated, guideline-based quality indicators (QIs) were used as a tool to assess guideline adherence for NHL care. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to calculate variation between hospitals and to identify characteristics explaining this variation. Data for the QIs regarding diagnostics, therapy, follow-up and organization of care, together with patient, tumor and professional related characteristics were retrospectively collected from medical records; hospital characteristics were derived from questionnaires and publically available data. Data of 423 patients diagnosed with NHL between October 2010 and December 2011 were analyzed. Guideline adherence, as measured with the QIs, varied considerably between the 19 hospitals: >20 % variation was identified in all 20 QIs and high variation between the hospitals (>50 %) was seen in 12 QIs, most frequently in the treatment and follow-up domain. Hospital variation in NHL care was associated more than once with the characteristics age, extranodal involvement, multidisciplinary consultation, tumor type, tumor aggressiveness, LDH level, therapy used, hospital region and availability of a PET-scanner. Fifteen characteristics identified at the patient level and at the hospital level could partly explain hospital variation in guideline adherence for NHL care. Particularly age was an important determinant: elderly were less likely to receive care as measured in the QIs. The identification of determinants can be used to improve the quality of NHL care, for example, for standardizing multidisciplinary consultations in daily practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,444,212
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,974
of 8,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,426
of 264,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#47
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 264,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.