| Title |
The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012780.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sabrina Bajwah, Adejoke O Oluyase, Deokhee Yi, Wei Gao, Catherine J Evans, Gunn Grande, Chris Todd, Massimo Costantini, Fliss E Murtagh, Irene J Higginson |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 171 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 56 | 33% |
| United States | 19 | 11% |
| Spain | 4 | 2% |
| Australia | 4 | 2% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 61 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 95 | 56% |
| Scientists | 39 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 35 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 543 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 543 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 58 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 9% |
| Researcher | 35 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 5% |
| Other | 83 | 15% |
| Unknown | 261 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 105 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 75 | 14% |
| Psychology | 25 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 2% |
| Other | 48 | 9% |
| Unknown | 267 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 141. 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 15 December 2022.
All research outputs
#275,783
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#467
of 12,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,541
of 416,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#14
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,911 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 416,306 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.