↓ Skip to main content

Death, contagion and shame: The potential of cancer survivors' advocacy in Zambia

Overview of attention for article published in Health Care for Women International, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Death, contagion and shame: The potential of cancer survivors' advocacy in Zambia
Published in
Health Care for Women International, February 2018
DOI 10.1080/07399332.2018.1424854
Pubmed ID
Authors

Britta Wigginton, Kim Farmer, Sharon Kapambwe, Lisa Fitzgerald, Marina M. Reeves, Sheleigh P. Lawler

Abstract

Cancer has become a global health concern with marked differences in the incidence and mortality rates between developing and developed countries. Understanding the factors hat shape uptake of preventative and screening services is key. We use in-depth interviews with 13 Zambian urban-based female cancer survivors to explore the facilitators and barriers to screening, diagnosis and treatment, with a particular focus on cultural influences. We identified a central discourse (i.e. a story told about cancer) in all of the interviews: 'cancer is a death sentence'. Most women referenced this discourse to describe their own, their family members', or community members' reactions to their diagnosis, along with references to cancer as 'contagious' and 'a shameful illness'. We also identified a theme entitled 'survivors as advocates', within which women described engaging in advocacy work to challenge stigma, misconceptions and misinformation about cancer; and advocating early detection and diagnosis, compliance with medical treatment and the sharing of success stories. This analysis points to the need for survivors to be front and centre of preventative efforts. Their personal experiences, legitimacy and connections in the community, and their enthusiasm in helping others should be fostered, particularly in low-resource settings.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 18 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Psychology 5 11%
Unspecified 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 23 49%
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 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Health Care for Women International
#510
of 708 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,364
of 448,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Care for Women International
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 708 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 448,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 54% of its contemporaries.