↓ Skip to main content

From symptom discovery to treatment - women's pathways to breast cancer care: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 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
From symptom discovery to treatment - women's pathways to breast cancer care: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Cancer, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12885-018-4219-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Moodley, Lydia Cairncross, Thurandrie Naiker, Deborah Constant

Abstract

Typically, women in South Africa (SA) are diagnosed with breast cancer when they self-present with symptoms to health facilities. The aim of this study was to determine the pathway that women follow to breast cancer care and factors associated with this journey. A cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in the Western Cape Province, SA, between May 2015 and May 2016. Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were interviewed to determine their socio-demographic profile; knowledge of risk factors, signs and symptoms; appraisal of breast changes; clinical profile and; key time events in the journey to care. The Model of Pathways to Treatment Framework underpinned the analysis. The total time (TT) between a woman noticing the first breast change and the date of scheduled treatment was divided into 3 intervals: the patient interval (PI); the diagnostic interval (DI) and the pre-treatment interval (PTI). For the PI, DI and PTI a bivariate comparison of median time intervals by various characteristics was conducted using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Cox Proportional-Hazards models were used to identify factors independently associated with the PI, DI and PTI. The median age of the 201 participants was 54 years, and 22% presented with late stage disease. The median TT was 110 days, with median patient, diagnostic and pre-treatment intervals of 23, 28 and 37 days respectively. Factors associated with the PI were: older age (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.86), initial symptom denial (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-0.97) and waiting for a lump to increase in size before seeking care (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33-0.77). Women with co-morbidities had a significantly longer DI (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.96) as did women who mentioned denial of initial breast symptoms (HR 4.61, 95% CI 1.80-11.78). The PTI was associated with late stage disease at presentation (HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.15-2.76). The Model of Pathways to Treatment provides a useful framework to explore patient's journeys to care and identified opportunities for targeted interventions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 171 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 18%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Researcher 16 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Lecturer 11 6%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 53 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 5%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 58 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,638,545
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,329
of 8,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,187
of 334,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#95
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,483 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 334,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 243 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.