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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Human papillomavirus (HPV) screening and cervical cancer burden. A Brazilian perspective
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virology Journal, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12985-015-0342-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adriana T. Lorenzi, Kari J. Syrjänen, Adhemar Longatto-Filho |
| Abstract |
This review tackles the issues related to disease burden caused by cervical cancer (CC) and its precursor (CIN) lesions in Brazil. A special focus is given to new technologies with potential to interfere with the development of CC by reducing the high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV)-induced lesions that remain a major public health burden in all developing countries where organized screening programs do not exist. Globally, 85 % of all incident CC and 50 % of CC deaths occur in the developing countries. Unfortunately, most regions of Brazil still demonstrate high mortality rates, ranking CC as the second most common cancer among Brazilian women. Recently, CC screening programs have been tailored in the country to enable early detection of CC precursor lesions and thereby reduce cancer mortality. A combination of HPV testing with liquid-based cytology (LBC) seems to be a promising new approach in CC screening, with high expectation to offer an adequate control of CC burden in this country. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 July 2020.
All research outputs
#6,150,063
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#624
of 3,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,807
of 263,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#9
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 263,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.