↓ Skip to main content

Cancer patients, emergencies service and provision of palliative care

Overview of attention for article published in Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Cancer patients, emergencies service and provision of palliative care
Published in
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, June 2016
DOI 10.1590/1806-9282.62.03.207
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Miranda, Suely Arruda Vidal, Maria Júlia Gonçalves de Mello, Jurema Telles de Oliveira Lima, Judith Correia Rêgo, Milena Cândido Pantaleão, Viviane Gomes Carneiro Leão, Fernando Antônio Ribeiro de Gusmão Filho, José Iran da Costa Júnior

Abstract

To describe the clinical and sociodemographic profile of cancer patients admitted to the Emergency Center for High Complexity Oncologic Assistance, observing the coverage of palliative and home care. Cross sectional study including adult cancer patients admitted to the emergency service (September-December/2011) with a minimum length of hospital stay of two hours. Student's t-test and Pearson chi-square test were used to compare the means. 191 patients were enrolled, 47.6% elderly, 64.4% women, 75.4% from the city of Recife and greater area. The symptom prevalent at admission was pain (46.6%). 4.2% of patients were linked to palliative care and 2.1% to home care. The most prevalent cancers: cervix (18.3%), breast (13.6%) and prostate (10.5%); 70.7% were in advanced stages (IV, 47.1%); 39.4% without any cancer therapy. Patients sought the emergency service on account of pain, probably due to the incipient coverage of palliative and home care. These actions should be included to oncologic therapy as soon as possible to minimize the suffering of the patient/family and integrate the skills of oncologists and emergency professionals.

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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 99 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 21%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 6 6%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 26 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 20%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 31 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 June 2016.
All research outputs
#10,061,148
of 12,577,171 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#269
of 452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,076
of 262,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,577,171 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 452 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 262,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.