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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Naturopathy/herbalism consultations by mid‐aged Australian women who have cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Cancer Care, August 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00610.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. ADAMS, D. SIBBRITT, A.F. YOUNG |
| Abstract |
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is now a significant practice issue for those delivering cancer care with a range of CAM being utilized by a significant number of patients with cancer. While various studies have explored the prevalence of CAM use among cancer patients, little is currently known about naturopathy/herbalism use by patients with cancer in Australia. This paper reports the prevalence of naturopath/herbalist consultations among mid-aged Australian women with cancer. The research was conducted as part of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health, with the data for this analysis coming from the third survey of 11,202 women aged 50-55, conducted in 2001. For all cancers combined, 15.7% of women with cancer were found to consult a naturopath/herbalist. Mid-aged women with cancer were found to be more likely to consult a naturopath/herbalist than mid-aged women without cancer. Naturopathy/herbalism consultations appear to be utilized by the women with cancer alongside and as a supplement to conventional health services. Given the prevalence of consultations with herbal therapists/naturopaths among mid-aged women with cancer in Australia, it is important that physicians and others involved in cancer patient care and management are informed and educated about naturopathy/herbalism and its use among their patients. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 17% |
| Psychology | 3 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 June 2012.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cancer Care
#471
of 1,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,616
of 68,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cancer Care
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,314 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 53% 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 68,048 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.