↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence of persistent pain after breast cancer treatment by detection mode among participants in population-based screening programs

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence of persistent pain after breast cancer treatment by detection mode among participants in population-based screening programs
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2768-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anabel Romero, Isabel Torà-Rocamora, Marisa Baré, Teresa Barata, Laia Domingo, Joana Ferrer, Núria Torà, Mercè Comas, Carmen Merenciano, Francesc Macià, Xavier Castells, Maria Sala, CAMISS Study Group

Abstract

To date, the study of the risks and benefits of breast cancer screening has not included the onset of persistent pain after breast cancer treatment within the context of population-based screening programs. Our purpose was to investigate the prevalence of persistent pain and associated factors in women diagnosed with breast cancer (screening or interval) in the context of a population-based breast cancer screening program in Spain. A total of 1,057 women participating in a population-based breast cancer screening program were diagnosed with breast cancer between 2000 and 2008. The women were treated surgically and followed-up to 2013. The risk of developing persistent pain was estimated through multivariate logistic regression analysis. Breast cancer was detected during routine screening in 732 women (69.3 %) and emerged as an interval cancer between two screening rounds in 325 (30.7 %). Persistent pain was present in 118 women (11.3 %). Women diagnosed through routine screening reported a higher prevalence of persistent pain (12.9 %) than those with interval cancers (7.8 %)(P < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified two other variables associated with persistent pain: having a Charlson index > =2 (Odds Ratio [OR]: 4.5 95 % Confidence Interval [CI]: 2.1-9.5) versus no comorbidities, and having undergone an axillary lymph node dissection (OR: 2.0 95 % CI: 1.0-4.0) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy. The prevalence of persistent pain was relatively low. The detection mode was not related to the onset of persistent pain. The factors associated with persistent pain were a Charlson index > =2 and the performance of axillary lymph node dissection. Women treated for breast cancer are at risk for developing persistent pain regardless of the detection mode, especially those with comorbidities and those who have undergone axillary lymph node dissection.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 21 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Psychology 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 23 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,931,785
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,479
of 8,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,642
of 324,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#65
of 187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 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 8,483 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 324,028 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 187 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 62% of its contemporaries.