↓ Skip to main content

Engaging diverse underserved communities to bridge the mammography divide

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
182 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
Engaging diverse underserved communities to bridge the mammography divide
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-47
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly K Engelman, Ana Paula Cupertino, Christine M Daley, Trish Long, Angelia Cully, Matthew S Mayo, Edward F Ellerbeck, Mugur V Geana, Allen Greiner

Abstract

Breast cancer screening continues to be underutilized by the population in general, but is particularly underutilized by traditionally underserved minority populations. Two of the most at risk female minority groups are American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) and Latinas. American Indian women have the poorest recorded 5-year cancer survival rates of any ethnic group while breast cancer is the number one cause of cancer mortality among Latina women. Breast cancer screening rates for both minority groups are near or at the lowest among all racial/ethnic groups. As with other health screening behaviors, women may intend to get a mammogram but their intentions may not result in initiation or follow through of the examination process. An accumulating body of research, however, demonstrates the efficacy of developing 'implementation intentions' that define when, where, and how a specific behavior will be performed. The formulation of intended steps in addition to addressing potential barriers to test completion can increase a person's self-efficacy, operationalize and strengthen their intention to act, and close gaps between behavioral intention and completion. To date, an evaluation of the formulation of implementation intentions for breast cancer screening has not been conducted with minority populations.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 175 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 17%
Researcher 24 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 36 20%
Unknown 42 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 24%
Social Sciences 23 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 12%
Psychology 22 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 18 10%
Unknown 48 26%
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 26 February 2011.
All research outputs
#20,142,242
of 22,647,730 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,772
of 14,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,351
of 182,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#118
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,647,730 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,727 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 182,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 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.