↓ Skip to main content

Do Ethnic Patterns in Cryptorchidism Reflect Those Found in Testicular Cancer?

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Urology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
23 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.
Article details
Title
Do Ethnic Patterns in Cryptorchidism Reflect Those Found in Testicular Cancer?
Published in
The Journal of Urology, May 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

There are established variations in testicular cancer incidence between ethnic groups within countries. It is currently unclear whether the occurrence of cryptorchidism-a known risk factor for testicular cancer-follows similar patterns. In New Zealand Māori have unusually high rates of testicular cancer compared to individuals of European ancestry. We hypothesized that ethnic trends in the incidence of cryptorchidism would reflect those for testicular cancer in this setting.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,535,011
of 27,780,120 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Urology
#13,730
of 19,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,898
of 211,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Urology
#105
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,780,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 211,800 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 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 53% of its contemporaries.