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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Systematic Assessment of Benefits and Risks to Guide Breast Cancer Screening Decisions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jama.2014.1398 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lydia E. Pace, Nancy L. Keating |
| Abstract |
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among US women. Mammography screening may be associated with reduced breast cancer mortality but can also cause harm. Guidelines recommend individualizing screening decisions, particularly for younger women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 149 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 39 | 26% |
| Spain | 12 | 8% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 7 | 5% |
| Argentina | 5 | 3% |
| Australia | 5 | 3% |
| Canada | 4 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 9% |
| Unknown | 55 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 99 | 66% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 27 | 18% |
| Scientists | 19 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 595 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | <1% |
| Unknown | 574 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 74 | 12% |
| Researcher | 70 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 66 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 11% |
| Other | 56 | 9% |
| Other | 135 | 23% |
| Unknown | 129 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 232 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 3% |
| Other | 88 | 15% |
| Unknown | 157 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 353. 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 12 October 2021.
All research outputs
#93,645
of 25,830,657 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#1,582
of 36,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#701
of 239,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#9
of 390 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,830,657 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 239,737 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 390 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.