↓ Skip to main content

Types of oral contraceptives and breast cancer survival among women enrolled in Medicaid: A competing-risk model

Overview of attention for article published in Maturitas, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
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.
Title
Types of oral contraceptives and breast cancer survival among women enrolled in Medicaid: A competing-risk model
Published in
Maturitas, October 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.10.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marsha E. Samson, Swann Arp Adams, Caroline M. Mulatya, Jiajia Zhang, Charles L. Bennett, James Hebert, Susan E. Steck

Abstract

Oral contraceptive pills have been implicated in the pathophysiology of breast cancer. Although many studies have examined the relationship between combined oral contraceptives (COCs) and breast cancer, there is a paucity of literature that discusses progestin-only oral contraceptives (POCs) and breast cancer. The purpose of this investigation is to examine potential associations between different types of oral contraceptives and breast cancer mortality in the South Carolina Medicaid population among different racial/ethnic groups. Subjects included 4816 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2000 and 2013. Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated to determine time-to-mortality rates among users of oral contraceptives. Competing-risks models and Cox multivariate survival models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer and other-cause mortality, as well as all-cause mortality. POCs were associated with a significantly decreased risk of breast cancer mortality (HR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.52) and a non-significant increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.52, 2.07). COCs increased the risk of breast cancer mortality (HR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.14, 2.28) and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.30, 2.57). Use of POCs may be associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer mortality. Due to the small sample size of POC users in the current study, additional research is needed to confirm these findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 13 18%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 21 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 22 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,433,197
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Maturitas
#902
of 2,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,547
of 323,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maturitas
#21
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 323,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 57% of its contemporaries.