↓ Skip to main content

Performance of a subsidised mammographic screening programme in Malaysia, a middle-income Asian country

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
Performance of a subsidised mammographic screening programme in Malaysia, a middle-income Asian country
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4015-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianne Lee, Shivaani Mariapun, Nadia Rajaram, Soo-Hwang Teo, Cheng-Har Yip

Abstract

The incidence of breast cancer in Asia is increasing because of urbanization and lifestyle changes. In the developing countries in Asia, women present at late stages, and mortality is high. Mammographic screening is the only evidence-based screening modality that reduces breast cancer mortality. To date, only opportunistic screening is offered in the majority of Asian countries because of the lack of justification and funding. Nevertheless, there have been few reports on the effectiveness of such programmes. In this study, we describe the cancer detection rate and challenges experienced in an opportunistic mammographic screening programme in Malaysia. From October 2011 to June 2015, 1,778 asymptomatic women, aged 40-74 years, underwent subsidised mammographic screening. All patients had a clinical breast examination before mammographic screening, and women with mammographic abnormalities were referred to a surgeon. The cancer detection rate and variables associated with a recommendation for adjunct ultrasonography were determined. The mean age for screening was 50.8 years and seven cancers (0.39%) were detected. The detection rate was 0.64% in women aged 50 years and above, and 0.12% in women below 50 years old. Adjunct ultrasonography was recommended in 30.7% of women, and was significantly associated with age, menopausal status, mammographic density and radiologist's experience. The main reasons cited for recommendation of an adjunct ultrasound was dense breasts and mammographic abnormalities. The cancer detection rate is similar to population-based screening mammography programmes in high-income Asian countries. Unlike population-based screening programmes in Caucasian populations where the adjunct ultrasonography rate is 2-4%, we report that 3 out of 10 women attending screening mammography were recommended for adjunct ultrasonography. This could be because Asian women attending screening are likely premenopausal and hence have denser breasts. Radiologists who reported more than 360 mammograms were more confident in reporting a mammogram as normal without adjunct ultrasonography compared to those who reported less than 180 mammograms. Our subsidised opportunistic mammographic screening programme is able to provide equivalent cancer detection rates but the high recall for adjunct ultrasonography would make screening less cost-effective.

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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 18%
Unspecified 5 6%
Other 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 32 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Unspecified 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 36 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 February 2017.
All research outputs
#15,443,875
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,410
of 14,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,590
of 419,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#167
of 202 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,958 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 419,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 202 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.