↓ Skip to main content

Chinese oncologists’ knowledge, attitudes and practice towards palliative care and end of life issues

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
Chinese oncologists’ knowledge, attitudes and practice towards palliative care and end of life issues
Published in
BMC Medical Education, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0668-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoli Gu, Wenwu Cheng

Abstract

Oncologists` knowledge and attitudes to palliative care (PC) and end of life (EOF) should be highlighted in order to give them effective education. This study is intended to provide a descriptive analysis of oncologists' knowledge, attitudes and practice toward PC and EOF issues in Mainland China. The questionnaire survey with 24 items investigating oncologists' demographic information, knowledge and attitudes toward PC and EOF issues was conducted among Chinese Oncology clinicians. The participants had a mean of 10.10 years practice in oncology. 43 (31.2 %) participants had received PC education. 73.9 % of the participants believed that PC should be considered when patients were not suitable to take surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and other anti-cancer therapies. 72.5 % of the participants believed that early PC integration can improve the quality of life in patients. Most of the oncology clinicians (73.9 %) believed that the doctor-in-charge was the appropriate person to inform patients of the diagnosis. However, only 11 participants chose to inform the diagnosis and disease prognosis to the patients, whereas 39.9 % of the participants chose to disclose it to Family/Caregivers first. Besides, Chinese oncologists were obviously unfamiliar with the concepts of euthanasia and related issues. This study indicated the insufficient knowledge toward PC and related issues of the Chinese oncologists. More attention should be paid on the education of PC among Oncologists in Mainland China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 21%
Other 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 35 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 21%
Unspecified 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 42 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#13,782,778
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,837
of 3,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,033
of 334,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#43
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 334,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.