↓ Skip to main content

Evidence‐based cancer service delivery in Australia

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Cancer Care, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Evidence‐based cancer service delivery in Australia
Published in
European Journal of Cancer Care, September 2014
DOI 10.1111/ecc.12242
Pubmed ID
Authors

D.M. Roder, K.M. Fong, M.P. Brown, J. Zalcberg, C.E. Wainwright

Abstract

The traditional roles of Australian cancer registries have been incidence, mortality and survival surveillance although increasingly, roles are being broadened to include data support for health-service management and evaluation. In some Australian jurisdictions, cancer stage and other prognostic data are being included in registry databases and this is being facilitated by an increase in structured pathology reporting by pathology and haematology laboratories. Data linkage facilities are being extended across the country at national and jurisdictional level, facilitating data linkage between registry data and data extracts from administrative databases that include treatment, screening and vaccination data, and self-reported data from large population cohorts. Well-established linkage protocols exist to protect privacy. The aim is to gain better data on patterns of care, service outcomes and related performance indicators for health-service management and population health and health-services research, at a time of increasing cost pressures. Barriers include wariness among some data custodians towards releasing data and the need for clearance for data release from large numbers of research ethics committees. Progress is being made though, and proof of concept is being established.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 22%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Unspecified 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 8 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 31%
Psychology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Unspecified 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 8 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2014.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cancer Care
#862
of 1,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,190
of 262,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cancer Care
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 262,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.