| Title |
Benefits and risks of circumcision.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Medical Association Journal, November 1981
|
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E Warner, E Strashin |
| Abstract |
Circumcisions are performed either prophylactically in the neonatal period or therapeutically at a later age. About 10% of males not circumcised at birth will eventually require circumcision. The present neonatal circumcision rate is about 80% in the United States and 40% in Canada. The single most important determinant of whether a newborn male will be circumcised is the attitude of the attending physician. The literature was reviewed to determine the proven benefits of circumcision and to compare these with the known risks. Circumcising the newborn facilitates penile hygiene, prevents cancer of the penis and decreases the incidence of genital herpes in later life. Whether it decreases the incidence of cancer of the cervix is still uncertain. More important, neonatal circumcision is associated with much lower morbidity and mortality and with lower costs than therapeutic circumcision. Thus, prophylactic circumcision is recommended for the male population as a whole. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 15% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 20% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 45% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 December 2021.
All research outputs
#7,049,212
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#4,678
of 9,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,789
of 7,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 7,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them