↓ Skip to main content

Making decisions about breast reconstruction: A systematic review of patient-reported factors influencing choice

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Making decisions about breast reconstruction: A systematic review of patient-reported factors influencing choice
Published in
Quality of Life Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11136-017-1555-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathy Flitcroft, Meagan Brennan, Andrew Spillane

Abstract

Many studies have explored women's reasons for choosing or declining a particular type of breast reconstruction (BR) following mastectomy for breast cancer. This systematic review synthesises women's reasons for choosing a range of BR options, including no BR, in different settings and across time. Thirteen databases were systematically searched, with 30 studies (4269 participants), meeting the selection criteria. Information on study aim and time frame, participation rate, design/methods, limitations/bias, reasons and conclusions, as well as participant clinical and demographic information, was reported. An overall quality score was generated for each study. Reasons were grouped into eight domains. While study methodology and results were heterogeneous, all reported reasons were covered by the eight domains: Feeling/looking normal; Feeling/looking good; Being practical; Influence of others; Relationship expectations; Fear; Timing; and Unnecessary. We found a strong consistency in reasons across studies, ranging from 52% of relevant publications citing relationship expectations as a reason for choosing BR, up to 91% citing fear as a reason for delaying or declining BR. Major thematic findings were a lack of adequate information about BR, lack of genuine choice for women and additional access limitations due to health system barriers. Understanding women's reasons for wanting or not wanting BR can assist clinicians to help women make choices most aligned with their individual values and needs. Our thematic findings have equity implications and illustrate the need for surgeons to discuss all clinically appropriate BR options with mastectomy patients, even if some options are not available locally.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 6 6%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 34 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Psychology 6 6%
Unspecified 5 5%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 36 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,057,676
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,468
of 2,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,714
of 310,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#33
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,910 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 310,129 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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 51% of its contemporaries.