↓ Skip to main content

Social determinants of prostate cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Social determinants of prostate cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5696-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine R. Brown, Ian Hambleton, Shawn M. Hercules, Nigel Unwin, Madhuvanti M. Murphy, E. Nigel Harris, Rainford Wilks, Marlene MacLeish, Louis Sullivan, Natasha Sobers-Grannum

Abstract

Prostate cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths among Caribbean men. However, little data exists on the influence of social factors on prostate cancer in the Caribbean setting. This article supports the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequalities by presenting a systematic review of evidence on the role of social determinants on prostate cancer in Caribbean men. It aims to determine the distribution, by known social determinants of health, of the frequency and adverse outcomes of prostate cancer among Caribbean populations. Observational studies reporting an association between a social determinant and prostate cancer frequency and outcomes were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, CINAHL, CUMED, LILACS, and IBECS databases. Fourteen social determinants and 7 prostate cancer endpoints were chosen, providing 98 possible relationship groups exploring the role of social determinants on prostate cancer. Observational studies with > 50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2016 were eligible. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. From 843 potentially relevant citations, 13 articles from 9 studies were included. From these included studies, 24 relationships were reported looking at 11 distinct relationship groups, leaving 90 relationship groups (92% of all relationship groups) unexplored. Study heterogeneity and risk of bias restricted results to a narrative synthesis in most instances. Meta-analyses showed more diagnosed prostate cancer among men with less formal education (n = 2 studies, OR 1.60, 95%CI 1.18-2.19) and among men who were married (n = 3 studies, OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.22-1.95). This review highlights limited evidence for a higher occurrence of diagnosed prostate cancer among Caribbean men with lower levels of education and among men who are married. The role of social determinants on prostate cancer among Caribbean men remains poorly understood. Improvements in study quantity and quality, and reduced variability in outcomes and reporting are needed. This report represents the current evidence, and provides a roadmap to future research priorities for a better understanding of Caribbean prostate cancer inequalities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 25%
Social Sciences 7 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 21 36%

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 16 September 2019.
All research outputs
#8,733,048
of 15,856,856 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,902
of 10,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,413
of 279,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,856,856 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,901 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 279,242 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.