↓ Skip to main content

Incidence of prostate and urological cancers in England by ethnic group, 2001-2007: a descriptive study

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Incidence of prostate and urological cancers in England by ethnic group, 2001-2007: a descriptive study
Published in
BMC Cancer, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1771-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mahiben Maruthappu, Isobel Barnes, Shameq Sayeed, Raghib Ali

Abstract

The aetiology of urological cancers is poorly understood and variations in incidence by ethnic group may provide insights into the relative importance of genetic and environmental risk factors. Our objective was to compare the incidence of four urological cancers (kidney, bladder, prostate and testicular) among six 'non-White' ethnic groups in England (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Black African, Black Caribbean and Chinese) to each other and to Whites. We obtained Information on ethnicity for all urological cancer registrations from 2001 to 2007 (n = 329,524) by linkage to the Hospital Episodes Statistics database. We calculated incidence rate ratios adjusted for age, sex and income, comparing the six ethnic groups (and combined 'South Asian' and 'Black' groups) to Whites and to each other. There were significant differences in the incidence of all four cancers between the ethnic groups (all p < 0.001). In general, 'non-White' groups had a lower incidence of urological cancers compared to Whites, except prostate cancer, which displayed a higher incidence in Blacks. (IRR 2.55) There was strong evidence of differences in risk between Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis for kidney, bladder and prostate cancer (p < 0.001), and between Black Africans and Black Caribbeans for all four cancers (p < 0.001). The risk of urological cancers in England varies greatly by ethnicity, including within groups that have traditionally been analysed together (South Asians and Blacks). In general, these differences are not readily explained by known risk factors, although the very high incidence of prostate cancer in both black Africans and Caribbeans suggests increased genetic susceptibility. g.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 21%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 12%
Social Sciences 4 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 8 24%

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 22 October 2015.
All research outputs
#6,908,043
of 12,007,882 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,725
of 4,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,045
of 251,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#80
of 295 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,007,882 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,380 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 251,816 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 295 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.