↓ Skip to main content

A Community Jury on PSA screening: what do well-informed men want the government to do about prostate cancer screening—a qualitative analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
29 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
A Community Jury on PSA screening: what do well-informed men want the government to do about prostate cancer screening—a qualitative analysis
Published in
BMJ Open, April 2014
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004682
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucie Rychetnik, Jenny Doust, Rae Thomas, Robert Gardiner, Geraldine MacKenzie, Paul Glasziou

Abstract

Cancer screening policies and programmes should take account of public values and concerns. This study sought to determine the priorities, values and concerns of men who were 'fully informed' about the benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening; and empirically examine the value of a community jury in eliciting public values on PSA screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 67 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 20%
Student > Bachelor 12 17%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 17 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,471,465
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#2,711
of 25,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,343
of 241,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#34
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,588 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 241,759 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.