↓ Skip to main content

Health Literacy, Health Communication Challenges, and Cancer Screening Among Rural Native Hawaiian and Filipino Women

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Education, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Health Literacy, Health Communication Challenges, and Cancer Screening Among Rural Native Hawaiian and Filipino Women
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education, March 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13187-013-0471-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tetine Sentell, May Rose Dela Cruz, Hyun-Hee Heo, Kathryn L. Braun

Abstract

Native Hawaiians and Filipinos are disproportionately impacted by cancer and are less likely to participate in cancer screening than whites. Limited information exists about health information pathways and health communication challenges as they relate to cancer screening in these groups. Six focus groups (n=77) of Native Hawaiian and Filipino women age 40+years were conducted to investigate these research gaps. Participants noted many health information challenges. Challenges were both practical and interpersonal and included both written and oral health communication. Practical challenges included "big" words, complexity of terms, and lack of plain English. Interpersonal issues included doctors rushing, doctors not assessing comprehension, and doctors treating respondents as patients not people. Women noted that they would often not ask questions even when they knew they did not understand because they did not want the provider to think negatively of them. Overarching themes to improve cancer communication gaps included: (1) the importance of family and community in health information dissemination, (2) the key role women play in interpreting health information for others, (3) the importance of personal experience and relationships to the salience of health information, and (4) the desire for local cultural relevance in health communication. Findings are discussed in light of the 2010 National Action Plan for Health Literacy.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 71 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 19%
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 26%
Social Sciences 13 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 14%
Psychology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2020.
All research outputs
#12,873,109
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#409
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,220
of 197,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 197,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.