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 |
Ethnicity and prostate cancer: the way to solve the screening problem?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-015-0427-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leonard P. Bokhorst, Monique J. Roobol |
| Abstract |
In their analysis in BMC Medicine, Lloyd et al. provide individual patient lifetime risks of prostate cancer diagnosis and prostate cancer death stratified by ethnicity. This easy to understand information is helpful for men to decide whether to start prostate-specific antigen testing (i.e. screening). A higher lifetime risk of prostate cancer death in some ethnic groups is not automatically a license to start screening. The potential benefit in the form of reducing metastases and death should still be weighed against the potential risk of over diagnosis. In case of ethnicity, this harm-to-benefit ratio does not differ between groups. Stratifying men for screening based on ethnicity is therefore not optimal and will not solve the current screening problem. Other methods for risk-stratifying men have been proven to produce a more optimal harm-to-benefit ratio.Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/13/171. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 55% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 29 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,693,195
of 25,072,471 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,744
of 3,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,610
of 269,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#40
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,072,471 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 269,976 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.