| Title |
Kelp use in patients with thyroid cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Endocrine, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12020-013-0048-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer E. Rosen, Paula Gardiner, Robert B. Saper, Elizabeth N. Pearce, Kallista Hammer, Rebecca L. Gupta-Lawrence, Stephanie L. Lee |
| Abstract |
To report on the incidence and use of kelp among patients with thyroid cancer. Data were collected using a web-based online anonymous survey under Institutional Review Board approval from Boston University. This report is based on 27 responses from subjects with thyroid cancer who use kelp. Demographic factors and complementary and alternative use were included. Respondents were primarily over age 40, white, female and have at least a high school education. The top five modalities were multivitamins, special diets, herbal supplements, prayer for health reasons and herbal tea. Only one patient reported perceiving a particular modality had a negative effect on treatment. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was more often perceived as being used to aid their thyroid cancer treatment than to help with symptoms. On average, respondents who use kelp also use at least 11 additional CAM modalities. Only 1/2 of respondents who use kelp reported telling their physicians about their CAM use, and nearly 1/3 of respondents reported their CAM use was neither known, prescribed nor asked about by their physicians. In comparison to both national surveys of the general US population and patients with thyroid cancer, kelp users with thyroid cancer use at least twice the number of additional CAM therapies and report their use far less often. Physicians who treat patients with thyroid cancer should be aware of these data to further assist in their assessment and care. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 21% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Professor | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 18 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 53% |
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 24 March 2014.
All research outputs
#13,710,226
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Endocrine
#791
of 1,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,070
of 221,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Endocrine
#11
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 221,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 63% of its contemporaries.