All well and good in a pressurised aircraft but not in non-pressurised types or those with engines that don't appreciate high speed/low power descents (think cylinders...).
In non-pressurised types I target 500'/min to keep my pax. ears comfortable. If piston as well then it also lets me avoid low power at high speed. Easiest way I know to calculate it is to use 2 x height-to-descend in thousands of feet = minutes required to descend. eg 12,000 height to lose = 24 mins prior to ETA is when to start the descent. In these types the change in TAS at lower altitudes is usually sufficient to allow for any speed reduction that may be necessary to configure for the approach. Further, starting a power reduction to approach or holding power from cruise power using 1" MAP/min at the appropriate time prior to ETA will have most types I know at an easily achieved approach speed for configuration changes.
In most cabin class piston twins this equates to ~6 or 7nm / 1000' if you prefer that method.
If you need a reduced rate of descent eg a pax. with ear trouble then target 300'/min and use 3 x height-to-lose instead.
In pressurised turboprops then I still tend to use minutes-to-ETA at whatever descent rate I care to use. The equivalent nm per 1000' height-to-lose depend on type eg a Kingair 90 I used to fly worked best at ~5nm / 1000' while a Kingair 200 worked for me using ~4nm / 1000'.
This was all based on arriving at the IAF or FAF configured for the approach.