↓ Skip to main content

Exploration of the treatment challenges in men with intellectual difficulties and testicular cancer as seen in Down syndrome: single centre experience

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Exploration of the treatment challenges in men with intellectual difficulties and testicular cancer as seen in Down syndrome: single centre experience
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0386-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaista Hafeez, Mausam Singhera, Robert Huddart

Abstract

Down syndrome is the most common chromosomal disorder in humans as well as the most common cause of inherited intellectual disability. A spectrum of physical and functional disability is associated with the syndrome as well as a predisposition to developing particular malignancies, including testicular cancers. These tumours ordinarily have a high cure rate even in widely disseminated disease. However, individuals with Down syndrome may have learning difficulties, behavioural problems, and multiple systemic complications that have the potential to make standard treatment more risky and necessitates individualized approach in order to avoid unacceptable harm. There is also suggestion that tumours may have a different natural history. Further, people with learning disabilities have often experienced poorer healthcare than the general population. In order to address these inequalities, legislation, professional bodies, and charities provide guidance; however, ultimately, consideration of the person in the context of their own psychosocial issues, comorbidities, and possible treatment strategies is vital in delivering optimal care. We aim to present a review of our own experience of delivering individualized care to this group of patients in order to close the existing health inequality gap.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Psychology 5 13%
Social Sciences 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 10 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 31 July 2015.
All research outputs
#3,736,714
of 22,815,414 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,957
of 3,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,770
of 263,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#45
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,815,414 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 263,581 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.