| Title |
Colorectal cancer following negative colonoscopy: is 5-year screening the correct interval to recommend?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-012-2543-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steven K. Nakao, Steven Fassler, Iswanto Sucandy, Soo Kim, D. Mark Zebley |
| Abstract |
Despite the high sensitivity of screening colonoscopy, polyps and cancers can still go undetected. With the polyp-to-cancer transformation cycle averaging 7-10 years, present guidelines recommend repeat colonoscopy within 10 years after negative screening. However, not all colorectal malignancies follow this decade-long progression. This study evaluates the incidence and pathology of colorectal cancers following a previous negative screening colonoscopy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 56% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 28% |
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 03 November 2013.
All research outputs
#13,021,996
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,661
of 5,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,804
of 172,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#38
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,998 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 172,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.