↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of users and implications for the use of complementary and alternative medicine in Ghanaian cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy and chemotherapy: a cross- sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 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
Characteristics of users and implications for the use of complementary and alternative medicine in Ghanaian cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy and chemotherapy: a cross- sectional study
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-13-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel Yarney, Andrew Donkor, Samuel Y Opoku, Lily Yarney, Isaac Agyeman-Duah, Alice C Abakah, Emmanuel Asampong

Abstract

There is widespread use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in Ghana, driven by cultural consideration and paradigm to disease causation. Whether there is concurrent use of conventional medicine and CAM in cancer patients is unknown. This study investigates the prevalence, pattern and predictors of CAM use in cancer patients. Overlapping toxicity, sources of information, and whether users inform their doctor about CAM use is examined.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 199 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Researcher 19 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 9%
Student > Bachelor 17 8%
Other 45 22%
Unknown 48 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 14%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 54 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 January 2013.
All research outputs
#18,326,065
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,497
of 3,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,613
of 285,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#59
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,619 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 285,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 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.