↓ Skip to main content

Organized breast screening improves reattendance compared to physician referral: a case control study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Organized breast screening improves reattendance compared to physician referral: a case control study
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1346-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ilia Makedonov, Sumei Gu, Lawrence F Paszat

Abstract

The Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) is a population-based breast screening programme, not requiring physician referral. OBSP invites women by mail to book their next screens. However, women who do not participate in the OBSP, may be referred by physicians to non-OBSP mammography facilities, which do not remind women to book their next screen. We identified women without breast cancer prior to June 30, 2011, having bilateral mammography (M) during a baseline period at age 50 - 69 at OBSP or non-OBSP facilities, and during a re-exposure period, at the same facility type. We used a case-control design to study the association of facility type and having M during an outcome period. Cases were women failing to receive the outcome M. Controls were matched by age, census tract, and socioeconomic status. Exposure was baseline facility type. Covariates were comorbidity, residential mobility, and primary care physician (PCP) characteristics. Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed. Cases were less likely to have been screened at OBSP facilities. Failure to receive the outcome M was associated with having moved after re-exposure M (OR = 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52, 1.71), having a male PCP (OR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.02, 1.05), or a higher Charlson score (OR = 1.06 per unit increase, 95% CI 1.03, 1.09). Having re-exposure M at an OBSP facility (OR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.18, 0.19)., having a Canadian trained PCP (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0. 8, 0.87), and having a PCP one year after the re-exposure M (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.97) were protective against failure to receive the outcome M. The OBSP, not requiring physician referral, and inviting women by mail to book their next screen, is associated with a lower probability of failure to reattend for subsequent screening than screening by PCP referral to non-OBSP facilities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Postgraduate 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 52%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 5 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#948,346
of 9,723,837 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#194
of 4,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,535
of 212,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#17
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,723,837 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,055 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 212,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 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 90% of its contemporaries.