↓ Skip to main content

Barriers and Motivators for Referral of Patients with Suspected Lynch Syndrome to Cancer Genetic Services: A Qualitative Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Personalized Medicine, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
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.
Title
Barriers and Motivators for Referral of Patients with Suspected Lynch Syndrome to Cancer Genetic Services: A Qualitative Study
Published in
Journal of Personalized Medicine, February 2014
DOI 10.3390/jpm4010020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yen Y. Tan, Lisa J. Fitzgerald

Abstract

This article explores the views of general practitioners and specialists on their referral of patients with suspected Lynch syndrome to cancer genetic services. Using a purposive maximum variation sampling strategy, we conducted semi-structured interviews face-to-face with 28 general practitioners and specialists in public or private hospitals and specialist clinics between March and August 2011. General practitioners and specialists were recruited in a major metropolitan area in Australia. Interview transcripts were reviewed by two independent researchers, and thematic analysis was performed using NVivo10 software. The main barriers and motivators identified were: (1) clinician-related (e.g., familiarity with Lynch syndrome and family history knowledge); (2) patient-related (e.g., patients' interests and personal experience with cancer); and (3) organizational-related (e.g., access to services, guidelines and referral pathway). Referral of patients with suspected Lynch syndrome to cancer genetic services is motivated and hindered by a range of individual, interpersonal and organizational factors. In order to improve the care and quality of life of patients and family with suspected Lynch syndrome, further research is needed to develop supportive tools for clinicians.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Social Sciences 5 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Computer Science 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 January 2015.
All research outputs
#7,385,258
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Personalized Medicine
#627
of 2,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,159
of 223,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Personalized Medicine
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 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 2,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 223,890 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.