↓ Skip to main content

Sobrevida por câncer de mama e iniquidade em saúde

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sobrevida por câncer de mama e iniquidade em saúde
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2015
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00145214
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maximiliano Ribeiro Guerra, Gulnar Azevedo e Silva, Mário Círio Nogueira, Isabel Cristina Gonçalves Leite, Raquel de Vasconcellos Carvalhaes de Oliveira, Jane Rocha Duarte Cintra, Maria Teresa Bustamante-Teixeira

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most frequent neoplasm in women, and some studies have shown social inequalities in incidence and survival, which are poorly investigated in Brazil. To assess iniquity in prognosis, a hospital-based cohort study was carried out. Follow-up was made by active search in medical records and in the Mortality Information System, phone calls, and consultation on Individual Tax-Collection Record status. Survival functions were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the Cox proportional hazards model was employed for prognostic assessment. Disease-specific survival was estimated at 76.3% (95%CI: 71.9-81.0) in 5 years. Women seen at public facilities had worse prognosis (HR = 1.79; 95%CI: 1.09-2.94), which was particularly due to the disease being diagnosed at a more advanced stage. These findings point to inequalities of access to screening actions, as women of lower social conditions with later diagnostic and therefore with worse prognostic.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Unspecified 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 23%
Unspecified 9 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 8 13%
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 17 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,382
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,331
of 276,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 276,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.