| Title |
An Intergenerational Approach to Prostate Cancer Education: Findings from a Pilot Project in the Southeastern USA
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-014-0618-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dawnyea D. Jackson, Otis L. Owens, Daniela B. Friedman, James R. Hebert |
| Abstract |
African Americans (AA) are more likely to develop and die from cancer than any other racial or ethnic group. This study assessed older and younger/middle-aged African-American (AA) men's (1) knowledge and attitudes about prostate cancer (PrCA) and PrCA screening, (2) participation in clinical research, and (3) health and cancer-related decision making. Twenty-eight AA men (14 older, mean age 59.8; 14 younger/middle age, mean age 30.4) received a PrCA education program and completed pre/post-education program surveys, as well as qualitative post-education interviews. Younger/middle-aged men were more knowledgeable about PrCA and PrCA screening than older men. Older men reported being invited to participate in a clinical trial more often than younger men but were more likely to report that participation in clinical trials was risky and they did not plan to participate in medical research in the future. Younger/middle-aged men were more willing to participate in a clinical trial in the future and reported fewer barriers to participation in clinical research. There is potential for using intergenerational communication strategies with older/younger AA male dyads in PrCA interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Librarian | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 13% |
| Psychology | 5 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 19 | 40% |
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 14 March 2014.
All research outputs
#17,715,061
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#721
of 1,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,064
of 224,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 224,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.