↓ Skip to main content

Prostate Cancer Support Groups

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Men's Health, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Prostate Cancer Support Groups
Published in
American Journal of Men's Health, July 2014
DOI 10.1177/1557988314543510
Pubmed ID
Authors

John L. Oliffe, Suzanne Chambers, Bernie Garrett, Joan L. Bottorff, Michael McKenzie, Christina S. Han, John S. Ogrodniczuk

Abstract

To understand prostate cancer (PCa) specialists' views about prostate cancer support groups (PCSGs), a volunteer sample of Canada-based PCa specialists (n = 150), including urologists (n = 100), radiation oncologists (n = 40), and medical oncologists (n = 10) were surveyed. The 56-item questionnaire used in this study included six sets of attitudinal items to measure prostate cancer specialists' beliefs about positive and negative influences of PCSGs, reasons for attending PCSGs, the attributes of effective PCSGs, and the value of face-to-face and web-based PCSGs. In addition, an open-ended question was included to invite additional input from participants. Results showed that PCSGs were positively valued, particularly for information sharing, education and psychosocial support. Inclusivity, privacy, and accessibility were identified as potential barriers, and recommendations were made for better marketing PCSGs to increase engagement. Findings suggest prostate cancer specialists highly valued the role and potential benefits of face-to-face PCSGs. Information provision and an educational role were perceived as key benefits. Some concerns were expressed about the ability of web-based PCSGs to effectively engage and educate men who experience prostate cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 23%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 20 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 2019.
All research outputs
#4,979,994
of 24,208,207 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Men's Health
#395
of 1,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,926
of 233,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Men's Health
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,208,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 233,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 62% of its contemporaries.