↓ Skip to main content

Predicting prostate cancer many years before diagnosis: how and why?

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Urology, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Predicting prostate cancer many years before diagnosis: how and why?
Published in
World Journal of Urology, November 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00345-011-0795-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew J. Vickers, Hans Lilja

Abstract

Evidence of reduced prostate cancer mortality from randomized trials in Europe supports early detection of prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Yet PSA screening has generated considerable controversy: it is far from clear that the benefits outweigh risks, in terms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. One way to shift the ratio of benefits to harm is to focus on men at highest risk, who have more to benefit than average. Neither family history nor any of the currently identified genomic markers offer sufficient risk stratification for practical use. However, there is considerable evidence that the levels of PSA in blood are strongly prognostic of the long-term risk of aggressive prostate cancer. Specifically, it is difficult to justify continuing to screen men aged 60 or older if they have a PSA less than 1 or 2 ng/ml; for men 45-60, intervals between PSA tests can be based on PSA levels, with 2-4-year retesting interval for men with PSA of 1 ng/ml or higher, and tests every 6-8 years for men with PSA <1 ng/ml. Men with the top 10% of PSAs at a young age (PSA ~1.5 ng/ml or higher below 50) are at particularly high risk and should be subject to intensive monitoring.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 43%
Computer Science 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 20%
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 25 November 2011.
All research outputs
#18,301,870
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Urology
#1,704
of 2,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,093
of 238,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Urology
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 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 2,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 238,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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.