| Title |
Trends in gynaecological cancers in the largest obstetrics and gynaecology hospital in China from 2003 to 2013
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3143-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
XueLian Li, SaiHua Zheng, ShangJie Chen, Feng Qin, Sandy Lau, Qi Chen |
| Abstract |
The incidence and the trend of gynaecological cancers have been suggested to vary by ethnicity and geographical regions. Whether the incidence and type of gynaecological cancers in China is different have not been fully investigated. In this study, we reported the trend of gynaecological cancers in China. Data on 13,518 women with gynaecological cancers were collected from the largest obstetrics and gynaecology hospital in China from 2003 to 2013. Data included age at diagnosis and the annual number of women with diagnosed endometrial, ovarian, cervical cancer and other gynaecological cancers. The number of women with diagnosed gynaecological cancers increased by almost sixfold in 2013 compared to that in 2003. It was largely due to the increase of women with newly diagnosed cervical cancer. The percentage of women with endometrial and ovarian cancer within total gynaecological cancers was decreased, whilst the percentage of cervical cancer significantly increased between 2003 and 2013. The mean age of women with endometrial or ovarian cancer at diagnosis was 53 or 48 years, respectively, which was no difference over 11 years. However, the mean age of women with cervical cancer at diagnosis was significantly delayed from 42 years in 2003 to 46 years since 2011. This was also confirmed by the age-specific distribution of gynaecological cancers over 11 years. Our study found that the age onset of endometrial and ovarian cancer has not changed over 11 years. But the age onset of cervical cancer is delayed since 2011 in China. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
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 06 February 2015.
All research outputs
#21,547,510
of 24,051,764 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,828
of 2,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,724
of 359,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#104
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,051,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,629 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 359,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.