↓ Skip to main content

Fluctuating Mastectomy Rates Across Time and Geography

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Fluctuating Mastectomy Rates Across Time and Geography
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, May 2013
DOI 10.1245/s10434-013-2982-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos A. Garcia-Etienne, Mariano Tomatis, Joerg Heil, Mahmoud Danaei, Christoph J. Rageth, Lorenza Marotti, Marco Rosselli del Turco, Antonio Ponti

Abstract

In 2009, 2 single-institution studies from the United States reported increasing mastectomy rates during the last decade. We have recently reported unilateral mastectomy trends from a European database and demonstrated a significant trend of decreasing mastectomy rates from 38.1 % in 2005 to 13.1 % in 2010. A recent study from the SEER registry in the United States confirmed a previously reported decrease in mastectomy rates from 40.1 % in year 2000 to 35.6 % in 2005, but showed a statistically significant increase in mastectomy rates up to 38.4 % in 2008. This report provides evidence that mastectomy trends may be in opposite directions in different geographical areas. The sharpest increase in mastectomy rates across all ages in the recent SEER study occurs right after year 2005, which interestingly corresponds with the time of publication of the meta-analysis by the EBCTCG that highlighted the importance of local control in breast cancer. The coincident timing raises the question of whether this evidence may have indirectly triggered an increase in mastectomy rates in the United States that would partially explain the observed trend, and more importantly, of whether an increase would be justified on this basis. Multiple factors influence the proportion between mastectomy and breast conservation, so it may be unreasonable to think of an optimal cutoff. There is not necessarily a right or wrong direction for mastectomy trends, but aiming to determine explanations for these differences may help provide a clearer insight of the decision-making process involved in the surgical management of breast cancer.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 21%
Student > Master 4 21%
Student > Postgraduate 3 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 58%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Psychology 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 11%
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 02 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,658,506
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#2,709
of 6,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,878
of 194,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#15
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 194,124 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.