↓ Skip to main content

The difference an end-of-life diagnosis makes: qualitative interviews with providers of community health care for frail older people

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, September 2020
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
69 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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 difference an end-of-life diagnosis makes: qualitative interviews with providers of community health care for frail older people
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, September 2020
DOI 10.3399/bjgp20x712805
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louisa Polak, Sarah Hopkins, Stephen Barclay, Sarah Hoare

Abstract

Increasing numbers of people die of the frailty and multimorbidity associated with old age, often without receiving an end-of-life diagnosis. Compared to those with a single life-limiting condition such as cancer, frail older people are less likely to access adequate community care. To address this inequality, guidance for professional providers of community health care encourages them to make end-of-life diagnoses more often in such people. These diagnoses centre on prognosis, making them difficult to establish given the inherent unpredictability of age-related decline. This difficulty makes it important to ask how care provision is affected by not having an end-of-life diagnosis. To explore the role of an end-of-life diagnosis in shaping the provision of health care outside acute hospitals. Qualitative interviews with 19 healthcare providers from community-based settings, including nursing homes and out-of-hours services. Semi-structured interviews (nine individual, three small group) were conducted. Data were analysed thematically and using constant comparison. In the participants' accounts, it was unusual and problematic to consider frail older people as candidates for end-of-life diagnosis. Participants talked of this diagnosis as being useful to them as care providers, helping them prioritise caring for people diagnosed as 'end-of-life' and enabling them to offer additional services. This prioritisation and additional help was identified as excluding people who die without an end-of-life diagnosis. End-of-life diagnosis is a first-class ticket to community care; people who die without such a diagnosis are potentially disadvantaged as regards care provision. Recognising this inequity should help policymakers and practitioners to mitigate it.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 69 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Researcher 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 18%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Psychology 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 January 2021.
All research outputs
#496,701
of 17,523,006 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#222
of 3,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,544
of 315,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#10
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,523,006 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. 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 315,901 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.