↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of geographical variation in access to chemotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, December 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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
A systematic review of geographical variation in access to chemotherapy
Published in
BMC Cancer, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-2026-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Chamberlain, Amanda Owen-Smith, Jenny Donovan, William Hollingworth

Abstract

Rising cancer incidence, the cost of cancer pharmaceuticals and the introduction of the Cancer Drugs Fund in England, but not other United Kingdom(UK) countries means evidence of 'postcode prescribing' in cancer is important. There have been no systematic reviews considering access to cancer drugs by geographical characteristics in the UK. Studies describing receipt of cancer drugs, according to healthcare boundaries (e.g. cancer network [UK]) were identified through a systematic search of electronic databases and grey literature. Due to study heterogeneity a meta-analysis was not possible and a narrative synthesis was performed. 8,780 unique studies were identified and twenty-six included following a systematic search last updated in 2015. The majority of papers demonstrated substantial variability in the likelihood of receiving chemotherapy between hospitals, health authorities, cancer networks and UK countries (England and Wales). After case-mix adjustment, there was up to a 4-5 fold difference in chemotherapy utilisation between the highest and lowest prescribing cancer networks. There was no strong evidence that rurality or distance travelled were associated with the likelihood of receiving chemotherapy and conflicting evidence for an effect of travel time. Considerable variation in chemotherapy prescribing between healthcare boundaries has been identified. The absence of associations with natural geographical characteristics (e.g. rurality) and receipt of chemotherapy suggests that local treatment habits, capacity and policy are more influential.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 10%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 14 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 21 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,315,007
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,034
of 8,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,464
of 396,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#21
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,487 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 396,429 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.