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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cutaneous Markers of Photo-Damage and Risk of Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Skin: A Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-0424 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohammad Khalesi, David C. Whiteman, Suhail A.R. Doi, Justin Clark, Michael G. Kimlin, Rachel E. Neale |
| Abstract |
Epidemiologic research has shown that cutaneous markers of photo-damage are associated with risk of basal cell carcinoma (BCC). However, there has been no previous attempt to calculate pooled risk estimates. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis after extracting relevant studies published up to January 2013 from five electronic databases. Eligible studies were those that permitted quantitative assessment of the association between histologically confirmed BCC and actinic keratoses, solar elastosis, solar lentigines, or telangiectasia. Seven eligible studies were identified and summary odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using both random and quality effects models. Having more than ten actinic keratoses was most strongly associated with BCC, conferring up to a fivefold increase in risk (OR: 4.97; 95% CI: 3.26-7.58). Other factors, including solar elastosis, solar lentigines, and telangiectasia had weaker but positive associations with BCC with ORs around 1.5. Markers of chronic photo-damage are positively associated with BCC. The presence of actinic keratoses was the most strongly associated with BCC of the markers examined. This work highlights the relatively modest association between markers of chronic ultraviolet exposure and BCC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 26% |
| Unknown | 10 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 50% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 January 2020.
All research outputs
#8,186,806
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#2,043
of 4,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,084
of 209,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#27
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 209,083 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.