↓ Skip to main content

The risk of bladder cancer in patients with urinary calculi: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Urolithiasis, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 331)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The risk of bladder cancer in patients with urinary calculi: a meta-analysis
Published in
Urolithiasis, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00240-017-1033-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhang Yu, Wu Yue, Li Jiuzhi, Jiang Youtao, Zhang Guofei, Guo Wenbin

Abstract

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between a history of urinary calculi (UC) and the risk of bladder cancer (BC). A literature search was performed from inception until July 2017. Studies that reported odds ratios (OR), relative risks or hazard ratios comparing the risk of BC in patients with the history of UC vs those without the history of UC were included. Pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect or fixed-effect method. Thirteen studies were included in our analysis to assess the association between a history of UC and risk of BC. The pooled OR of BC in patients with UC was 1.87 (95% CI, 1.45-2.41). Bladder calculi [OR, 2.17 (95% CI, 1.52-3.08)] had a higher risk of BC than kidney calculi [OR, 1.39 (95% CI, 1.06-1.82)]. The subjects had a history of UC that was associated with increased BC risk both in males [OR, 2.04 (95% CI, 1.41-2.96)] and in females [OR, 2.99 (95% CI, 2.37-3.76)]. The subgroup analysis demonstrated that UC increasing risk of BC both in case-control studies [OR, 1.75 (95% CI, 1.25-2.45)] and cohort studies [OR, 2.27 (95% CI, 1.55-3.32)]. The pooled OR of BC risk in patients with UC were 1.60 (95% CI, 1.15-2.24) in America, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.14-1.64) in Europe and 3.05 (95% CI, 2.21-4.21) in Asia, respectively. Our study demonstrates a significant increased risk of BC in patients with prior UC. This finding suggests that a history of UC is associated with BC and may impact clinical management and cancer surveillance. Further studies still needed to confirm the findings.

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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 20 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 37%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 22 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,237,869
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Urolithiasis
#19
of 331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,930
of 441,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Urolithiasis
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 441,879 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 87% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.