| Title |
Determining the date of diagnosis – is it a simple matter? The impact of different approaches to dating diagnosis on estimates of delayed care for ovarian cancer in UK primary care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-9-42 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A Rosemary Tate, Alexander GR Martin, Tarita Murray-Thomas, Sarah R Anderson, Jackie A Cassell |
| Abstract |
Studies of cancer incidence and early management will increasingly draw on routine electronic patient records. However, data may be incomplete or inaccurate. We developed a generalizable strategy for investigating presenting symptoms and delays in diagnosis using ovarian cancer as an example. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 31% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 43% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 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 13 June 2016.
All research outputs
#13,372,313
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,278
of 2,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,655
of 111,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 111,262 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.