| Title |
Cancer Training for Frontline Healthcare Providers in Tanzania
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-017-1274-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tara J. Rick, Cassondra M. Deming, Janey R. Helland, Kari A. Hartwig |
| Abstract |
Cervical and breast cancer are responsible for the highest cancer-related mortality in Tanzania, although both are preventable or curable if diagnosed at an early stage. Limited knowledge of cervical cancer by clinic and dispensary level healthcare providers in Tanzania is a barrier for prevention and control strategies. The purpose of the study was to provide basic oncology training to frontline healthcare workers with a focus on cervical and breast cancer in order to increase knowledge. A 1-day cancer training symposium was conducted in Arusha, Tanzania, with 43 clinicians. Pre- and post-intervention surveys assessed cancer knowledge and confidence of clinicians in risk assessment. Sixty-nine percent of the participants reported never receiving any cervical cancer training in the past. A significant difference was found between the pre- and post-test in a majority of knowledge questions and in reported confidence recognizing signs and symptoms of breast and cervical cancer (p < 0.05). The 1-day community oncology training symposium was effective in delivering and increasing basic knowledge about cervical and breast cancers to these healthcare providers. The low level of baseline cancer knowledge among frontline medical providers in Tanzania illustrates the need for increased training around the country. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 20 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 24 | 42% |
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 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,874,942
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#490
of 1,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,129
of 287,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#10
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 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 1,152 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 287,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.