↓ Skip to main content

Identifying patterns of breast cancer care provided at high-volume hospitals: a classification and regression tree analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Identifying patterns of breast cancer care provided at high-volume hospitals: a classification and regression tree analysis
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10549-015-3561-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda L. Kong, Liliana E. Pezzin, Ann B. Nattinger

Abstract

There is a growing body of literature linking hospital volume to outcomes in breast cancer. However, the mechanism through which volume influences outcome is poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between hospital volume of breast cancer cases and patterns of processes of care in a population-based cohort of Medicare patients. A previously described and validated algorithm was applied to Medicare claims for newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in 2003 to identify potential subjects. Breast cancer patients were recruited to participate in a survey study examining breast cancer outcomes, and data were merged with Medicare claims and state tumor registries. Hospital volume was divided into tertiles. A Classification and Regression Tree (CART) model was performed to look for statistically significant relationships between patterns of processes of care and hospital volume. Using CART analysis, eight patterns of care were identified that differentiated breast cancer care at high- versus low-volume hospitals. Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) was the single process of care that demonstrated the greatest differentiation across hospitals with differing volumes. Four patterns of care significantly predicted that a patient was less likely to be treated at a high-volume hospital. Our study demonstrates differences in patterns of processes of care between low- and high-volume hospitals. Hospital volume was associated with several patterns of care that reflect the most current standards of care, particularly SLND. Greater adoption of these patterns by low-volume hospitals could improve the overall quality of care for breast cancer.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 12 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 12 48%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,427,608
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,716
of 4,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,775
of 274,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#51
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 274,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.