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 |
Cancer and central nervous system disorders: protocol for an umbrella review of systematic reviews and updated meta-analyses of observational studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-017-0466-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ferrán Catalá-López, Brian Hutton, Jane A. Driver, Matthew J. Page, Manuel Ridao, José M. Valderas, Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo, Jaume Forés-Martos, Salvador Martínez, Ricard Gènova-Maleras, Diego Macías-Saint-Gerons, Benedicto Crespo-Facorro, Eduard Vieta, Alfonso Valencia, Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study will be to synthesize the epidemiological evidence and evaluate the validity of the associations between central nervous system disorders and the risk of developing or dying from cancer. We will perform an umbrella review of systematic reviews and conduct updated meta-analyses of observational studies (cohort and case-control) investigating the association between central nervous system disorders and the risk of developing or dying from any cancer or specific types of cancer. Searches involving PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Web of Science will be used to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. In addition, online databases will be checked for observational studies published outside the time frames of previous reviews. Eligible central nervous system disorders will be Alzheimer's disease, anorexia nervosa, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, autism spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, depression, Down's syndrome, epilepsy, Huntington's disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia. The primary outcomes will be cancer incidence and cancer mortality in association with a central nervous system disorder. Secondary outcome measures will be site-specific cancer incidence and mortality, respectively. Two reviewers will independently screen references identified by the literature search, as well as potentially relevant full-text articles. Data will be abstracted, and study quality/risk of bias will be appraised by two reviewers independently. Conflicts at all levels of screening and abstraction will be resolved through discussion. Random-effects meta-analyses of primary observational studies will be conducted where appropriate. Parameters for exploring statistical heterogeneity are pre-specified. The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) criteria and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used for determining the quality of evidence for cancer outcomes. Our study will establish the extent of the epidemiological evidence underlying the associations between central nervous system disorders and cancer and will provide a rigorous and updated synthesis of a range of important site-specific cancer outcomes. PROSPERO CRD42016052762. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 181 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 15% |
| Researcher | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 18% |
| Unknown | 41 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 19% |
| Psychology | 22 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 33 | 18% |
| Unknown | 54 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,546,553
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,431
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,956
of 308,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#38
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 308,981 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.