↓ Skip to main content

Follow-Up Recommendations after Diagnosis of Primary Cutaneous Melanoma: A Population-Based Study in New South Wales, Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Follow-Up Recommendations after Diagnosis of Primary Cutaneous Melanoma: A Population-Based Study in New South Wales, Australia
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, January 2018
DOI 10.1245/s10434-017-6319-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca L. Read, Christine M. Madronio, Anne E. Cust, Chris Goumas, Caroline G. Watts, Scott Menzies, Austin M. Curtin, Graham Mann, John F. Thompson, Rachael L. Morton

Abstract

Follow-up practices after diagnosis and treatment of primary cutaneous melanoma vary considerably. We aimed to determine factors associated with recommendations for follow-up setting, frequency, skin surveillance, and concordance with clinical guidelines. The population-based Melanoma Patterns of Care study documented clinicians' recommendations for follow-up for 2148 patients diagnosed with primary cutaneous melanoma over a 12-month period (2006/2007) in New South Wales, Australia. Multivariate log binomial regression models adjusted for patient and lesion characteristics were used to examine factors associated with follow-up practices. Of 2158 melanomas, Breslow thickness was < 1 mm for 57% and ≥ 1 mm for 30%, while in situ melanomas accounted for 13%. Follow-up was recommended for 2063 patients (96%). On multivariate analysis, factors associated with a recommendation for follow-up at a specialist center were Breslow thickness ≥ 1 mm [prevalence ratio (PR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.09] and initial treatment at a specialist center (PR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08-1.16). Longer follow-up intervals of > 3 months were more likely to be recommended for females, less likely for people living in rural compared with urban areas, and less likely for thicker (≥ 1 mm) melanomas compared with in situ melanomas. Skin self-examination was encouraged in 84% of consultations and was less likely to be recommended for patients ≥ 70 years (PR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.93) and for those with thicker (≥ 1 mm) melanomas (PR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.99). Only 1% of patients were referred for psychological care. Follow-up recommendations were generally consistent with Australian national guidelines for management of melanoma, however some variations could be targeted to improve patient outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Other 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Psychology 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,807,934
of 24,615,420 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#3,788
of 6,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,804
of 452,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#59
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,615,420 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,963 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 452,639 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.