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 |
How should we discuss genetic testing with women newly diagnosed with breast cancer? Design and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of two models of delivering education about treatment-focused genetic testing to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2407-12-320 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaaren J Watts, Bettina Meiser, Gillian Mitchell, Judy Kirk, Christobel Saunders, Michelle Peate, Jessica Duffy, Patrick J Kelly, Margaret Gleeson, Kristine Barlow-Stewart, Belinda Rahman, Michael Friedlander, Kathy Tucker, for the TFGT Collaborative Group |
| Abstract |
Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing offered shortly after a breast cancer diagnosis to inform women's treatment choices - treatment-focused genetic testing 'TFGT' - has entered clinical practice in specialist centers and is likely to be soon commonplace in acute breast cancer management, especially for younger women. Yet the optimal way to deliver information about TFGT to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer is not known, particularly for those who were not suspected of having a hereditary breast cancer syndrome prior to their cancer diagnosis. Also, little is known about the behavioral and psychosocial impact or cost effectiveness of educating patients about TFGT. This trial aims to examine the impact and efficiency of two models of educating younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about genetic testing in order to provide evidence for a safe and effective future clinical pathway for this service. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 195 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 14% |
| Researcher | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 40 | 20% |
| Unknown | 43 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 28% |
| Psychology | 30 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 12% |
| Unknown | 52 | 26% |
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 21 September 2014.
All research outputs
#14,151,903
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,351
of 8,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,972
of 164,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#35
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,245 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 164,536 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 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 53% of its contemporaries.