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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Men and women: beliefs about cancer and about screening
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, November 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-9-431 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tracey H Sach, David K Whynes |
| Abstract |
Cancer screening programmes in England are publicly-funded. Professionals' beliefs in the public health benefits of screening can conflict with individuals' entitlements to exercise informed judgement over whether or not to participate. The recognition of the importance of individual autonomy in decision making requires greater understanding of the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs upon which people's screening choices are founded. Until recently, the technology available required that cancer screening be confined to women. This study aimed to discover whether male and female perceptions of cancer and of screening differed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 107 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 16% |
| Psychology | 15 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 31% |
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 17 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,253,344
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,258
of 14,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,752
of 165,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#53
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 165,295 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.