↓ Skip to main content

Urban Women’s Preferences for Learning of Their Mammogram Result: A Qualitative Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Education, November 2011
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Urban Women’s Preferences for Learning of Their Mammogram Result: A Qualitative Study
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education, November 2011
DOI 10.1007/s13187-011-0284-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin N. Marcus, Darlene Drummond, Noella Dietz

Abstract

Research suggests that communication of mammogram results is flawed for many low-income ethnic minority women. This study conducted four focus groups with low-income inner-city minority women (n = 34). The goals of our project were: (1) to elucidate women's experiences learning of their result; (2) to elicit their preferences as to how this communication could be improved; and (3) to gather information to help inform the development of a new tool for communicating mammogram results. Salient themes included dissatisfaction with result communication; difficulty elucidating the meaning of a typical results notification letter; a preference for direct verbal communication of results and for print materials that included pictures, testimonials, and an action plan including a hotline to call with questions; and a strong interest in advance education about the likelihood of having to return for additional follow up. Video and other programs to inform patients before the test about what happens after may improve patient satisfaction and enhance women's understanding of their personal result and follow up plan.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 44 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Librarian 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 15 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Psychology 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 16 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 June 2013.
All research outputs
#2,359,601
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#54
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,034
of 142,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 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 1,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 142,925 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 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them