↓ Skip to main content

Expenditure and resource utilisation for cervical screening in Australia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Expenditure and resource utilisation for cervical screening in Australia
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-446
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jie-Bin Lew, Kirsten Howard, Dorota Gertig, Megan Smith, Mark Clements, Carolyn Nickson, Ju-Fang Shi, Suzanne Dyer, Sarah Lord, Prudence Creighton, Yoon-Jung Kang, Jeffrey Tan, Karen Canfell

Abstract

The National Cervical Screening Program in Australia currently recommends that women aged 18-69 years are screened with conventional cytology every 2 years. Publicly funded HPV vaccination was introduced in 2007, and partly as a consequence, a renewal of the screening program that includes a review of screening recommendations has recently been announced. This study aimed to provide a baseline for such a review by quantifying screening program resource utilisation and costs in 2010.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 53 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 41%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 11 20%

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 06 December 2012.
All research outputs
#9,508,544
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,301
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,095
of 260,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#291
of 385 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. 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 260,145 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 385 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.