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 |
Do not jump too quickly to conclusions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/bcr3213 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel B Kopans |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: A great deal of misinformation has been promulgated about mammography screening. For example, there is no biological or scientific support for the use of the age of 50 years as a threshold for screening. Mammography screening can reduce deaths from breast cancer even if the rate of advanced cancers is not decreased. The suggestion that screening results in massive amounts of overdiagnosis is based upon faulty methodology. The results reported in the recent study by Nederend and colleagues may be due to the screening interval and thresholds used for intervention. What is clear, however, is that they do not show that screening is ineffective. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 3 | 25% |
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 50% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
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 28 December 2017.
All research outputs
#2,655,815
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#267
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,885
of 178,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#2
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 2,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 178,589 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.