↓ Skip to main content

How do treatment aims in the last phase of life relate to hospitalizations and hospital mortality? A mortality follow-back study of Dutch patients with five types of cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
How do treatment aims in the last phase of life relate to hospitalizations and hospital mortality? A mortality follow-back study of Dutch patients with five types of cancer
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-3889-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariska Oosterveld-Vlug, Gé Donker, Femke Atsma, Linda Brom, Yvonne de Man, Stef Groenewoud, Bregje Onwuteaka-Philipsen

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to describe and compare the relation between treatment aims, hospitalizations, and hospital mortality for Dutch patients who died from lung, colorectal, breast, prostate, or pancreatic cancer. A mortality follow-back study was conducted within a sentinel network of Dutch general practitioners (GPs), who recorded the end-of-life care of 691 patients who died from one of the abovementioned cancer types between 2009 and 2015. Differences in care by type of cancer were analyzed using multilevel analyses to control for clustering within general practices. Among all cancer types, patients with prostate cancer most often and patients with pancreatic cancer least often had a palliative treatment aim a month before death (95% resp. 84%). Prostate cancer patients were also least often admitted to hospital in the last month of life (18.5%) and least often died there (3.1%), whereas lung cancer patients were at the other end of the spectrum with 41.8% of them being admitted to hospital and 22.6% dying in hospital. Having a palliative treatment aim and being older were significantly associated with less hospital admissions, and having a palliative treatment aim, having prostate cancer, and dying in a more recent year were significantly associated with less hospital deaths. There is large variation between patients with different cancer types with regard to treatment aims, hospital admissions, and hospital deaths. The results highlight the need for early initiation of GP palliative care to support patients from all cancer types to stay at the place they prefer as long as possible.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 30%
Unspecified 2 20%
Student > Master 1 10%
Professor 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Other 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 30%
Unspecified 2 20%
Social Sciences 1 10%
Engineering 1 10%
Other 0 0%

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 05 January 2019.
All research outputs
#11,706,317
of 13,183,063 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,273
of 2,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,362
of 271,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#69
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,183,063 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 271,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.