↓ Skip to main content

Social factors matter in cancer risk and survivorship

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Causes & Control, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#47 of 2,267)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
Title
Social factors matter in cancer risk and survivorship
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10552-018-1043-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorraine T. Dean, Sarah Gehlert, Marian L. Neuhouser, April Oh, Krista Zanetti, Melody Goodman, Beti Thompson, Kala Visvanathan, Kathryn H. Schmitz

Abstract

Greater attention to social factors, such as race/ethnicity, socioeconomic position, and others, are needed across the cancer continuum, including breast cancer, given differences in tumor biology and genetic variants have not completely explained the persistent Black/White breast cancer mortality disparity. In this commentary, we use examples in breast cancer risk assessment and survivorship to demonstrate how the failure to appropriately incorporate social factors into the design, recruitment, and analysis of research studies has resulted in missed opportunities to reduce persistent cancer disparities. The conclusion offers recommendations for how to better document and use information on social factors in cancer research and care by (1) increasing education and awareness about the importance of inclusion of social factors in clinical research; (2) improving testing and documentation of social factors by incorporating them into journal guidelines and reporting stratified results; and (3) including social factors to refine extant tools that assess cancer risk and assign cancer care. Implementing the recommended changes would enable more effective design and implementation of interventions and work toward eliminating cancer disparities by accounting for the social and environmental contexts in which cancer patients live and are treated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 11%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 26 22%
Unknown 41 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 46 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 73. 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 15 March 2022.
All research outputs
#574,862
of 25,159,758 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#47
of 2,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,852
of 337,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,159,758 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,267 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 337,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.