↓ Skip to main content

Current practices in spatial analysis of cancer data: mapping health statistics to inform policymakers and the public

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, November 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
183 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Current practices in spatial analysis of cancer data: mapping health statistics to inform policymakers and the public
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, November 2006
DOI 10.1186/1476-072x-5-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

B Sue Bell, Richard E Hoskins, Linda Williams Pickle, Daniel Wartenberg

Abstract

To communicate population-based cancer statistics, cancer researchers have a long tradition of presenting data in a spatial representation, or map. Historically, health data were presented in printed atlases in which the map producer selected the content and format. The availability of geographic information systems (GIS) with comprehensive mapping and spatial analysis capability for desktop and Internet mapping has greatly expanded the number of producers and consumers of health maps, including policymakers and the public.Because health maps, particularly ones that show elevated cancer rates, historically have raised public concerns, it is essential that these maps be designed to be accurate, clear, and interpretable for the broad range of users who may view them. This article focuses on designing maps to communicate effectively. It is based on years of research into the use of health maps for communicating among public health researchers.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Canada 4 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Sweden 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 165 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 20%
Researcher 34 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 6%
Other 46 25%
Unknown 16 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 19%
Social Sciences 29 16%
Computer Science 15 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 15 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 6%
Other 52 28%
Unknown 26 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#8,262,107
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#270
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,177
of 88,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
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 88,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.