↓ Skip to main content

Who and when should we screen for prostate cancer? Interviews with key opinion leaders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, November 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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
31 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Who and when should we screen for prostate cancer? Interviews with key opinion leaders
Published in
BMC Medicine, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0526-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sigrid Carlsson, Michael Leapman, Peter Carroll, Fritz Schröder, Peter C. Albertsen, Dragan Ilic, Michael Barry, Dominick L. Frosch, Andrew Vickers

Abstract

Prostate cancer screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is highly controversial. In this Q & A, Guest Editors for BMC Medicine's 'Spotlight on Prostate Cancer' article collection, Sigrid Carlsson and Andrew Vickers, invite some of the world's key opinion leaders to discuss who, and when, to screen for prostate cancer. In response to the points of view from the invited experts, the Guest Editors summarize the experts' views and give their own personal opinions on PSA screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Engineering 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#1,241,133
of 24,353,295 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#863
of 3,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,488
of 396,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#15
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,353,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,747 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 396,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 71% of its contemporaries.