↓ Skip to main content

Opportunistic mammography screening provides effective detection rates in a limited resource healthcare system

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Opportunistic mammography screening provides effective detection rates in a limited resource healthcare system
Published in
BMC Cancer, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1419-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yew-Ching Teh, Gie-Hooi Tan, Nur Aishah Taib, Kartini Rahmat, Caroline Judy Westerhout, Farhana Fadzli, Mee-Hoong See, Suniza Jamaris, Cheng-Har Yip

Abstract

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women world-wide. In low and middle income countries, where there are no population-based mammographic screening programmes, late presentation is common, and because of inadequate access to optimal treatment, survival rates are poor. Mammographic screening is well-studied in high-income countries in western populations, and because it has been shown to reduce breast cancer mortality, it has become part of the healthcare systems in such countries. However the performance of mammographic screening in a developing country is largely unknown. This study aims to evaluate the performance of mammographic screening in Malaysia, a middle income country, and to compare the stage and surgical treatment of screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancer. A retrospective review of 2510 mammograms performed from Jan to Dec 2010 in a tertiary medical centre is carried out. The three groups identified are the routine (opportunistic) screening group, the targeted (high risk) screening group and the diagnostic group. The performance indicators of each group is calculated, and stage at presentation and treatment between the screening and diagnostic group is analyzed. The cancer detection rate in the opportunistic screening group, targeted screening group, and the symptomatic group is 0.5 %, 1.25 % and 26 % respectively. The proportion of ductal carcinoma in situ is 23.1 % in the two screening groups compared to only 2.5 % in the diagnostic group. Among the opportunistic screening group, the cancer detection rate was 0.2 % in women below 50 years old compared to 0.65 % in women 50 years and above. The performance indicators are within international standards. Early-staged breast cancer (Stage 0-2) were 84.6 % in the screening groups compared to 61.1 % in the diagnostic group. From the results, in a setting with resource constraints, targeted screening of high risk individuals will give a higher yield, and if more resources are available, population-based screening of women 50 and above is effective. Opportunistic mammographic screening is feasible and effective in a middle income country with performance indicators within international standards. Waiting until women are symptomatic will lead to more advanced cancers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 22%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 40%
Unspecified 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Engineering 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 16 18%

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 08 December 2020.
All research outputs
#12,018,579
of 19,602,522 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,831
of 7,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,274
of 245,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,602,522 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,061 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 245,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them