↓ Skip to main content

Mass media and risk factors for cancer: the under-representation of age

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Mass media and risk factors for cancer: the under-representation of age
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5341-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Macdonald, Yvonne Cunningham, Chris Patterson, Katie Robb, Una Macleod, Thomas Anker, Shona Hilton

Abstract

Increasing age is a risk factor for developing cancer. Yet, older people commonly underestimate this risk, are less likely to be aware of the early symptoms, and are more likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage cancer. Mass media are a key influence on the public's understanding health issues, including cancer risk. This study investigates how news media have represented age and other risk factors in the most common cancers over time. Eight hundred articles about the four most common cancers (breast, prostate, lung and colorectal) published within eight UK national newspapers in 2003, 2004, 2013 and 2014 were identified using the Nexis database. Relevant manifest content of articles was coded quantitatively and subjected to descriptive statistical analysis in SPSS to identify patterns across the data. Risk was presented in half of the articles but this was rarely discussed in any depth and around a quarter of all articles introduced more than one risk factor, irrespective of cancer site. Age was mentioned as a risk factor in approximately 12% of all articles and this varied by cancer site. Age was most frequently reported in relation to prostate cancer and least often in articles about lung cancer. Articles featuring personal narratives more frequently focused on younger people and this was more pronounced in non-celebrity stories; only 15% of non-celebrity narratives were about people over 60. Other common risks discussed were family history and genetics, smoking, diet, alcohol, and environmental factors. Family history and genetics together featured as the most common risk factors. Risk factor reporting varied by site and family history was most commonly associated with breast cancer, diet with bowel cancer and smoking with lung cancer. Age and older adults were largely obscured in media representation of cancer and cancer experience. Indeed common risk factors in general were rarely discussed in any depth. Our findings will usefully inform the development of future cancer awareness campaigns and media guidelines. It is important that older adults appreciate their heightened risk, particularly in the context of help-seeking decisions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 33 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Psychology 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 36 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 20 June 2018.
All research outputs
#604,377
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#582
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,595
of 328,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#26
of 306 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 328,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 306 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.