↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
228 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
Health system barriers and enablers to early access to breast cancer screening, detection, and diagnosis: a global analysis applied to the MENA region
Published in
Public Health (Elsevier), August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.07.020
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. Bowser, H. Marqusee, M. El Koussa, R. Atun

Abstract

To identify barriers and enablers that impact access to early screening, detection, and diagnosis of breast cancer both globally and more specifically in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region (with a specific focus on Egypt, Jordan, Oman, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates [UAE], and Kuwait) with a specific focus on the health system. A systematic review of literature. We conducted a systematic reviewing using the PRISMA methodology. We searched PubMed, Global Index Medicus, and EMBASE for studies on 'breast cancer', 'breast neoplasm,' or 'screening, early detection, and early diagnosis' as well as key words related to the following barriers: religion, culture, health literacy, lack of knowledge/awareness/understanding, attitudes, fatalism/fear, shame/embarrassment, and physician gender from January 1, 2000 until September 1, 2016. Two independent reviewers screened both titles and abstracts. The application of inclusion and exclusion criteria yielded a final list of articles. A conceptual framework was used to guide the thematic analysis and examine health system barriers and enablers to breast cancer screening at the broader macro health system level, at the health provider level, and the individual level. The analysis was conducted globally and in the MENA region. A total of 11,936 references were identified through the initial search strategy, of which 55 were included in the final thematic analysis. The results found the following barriers and enablers to access to breast cancer screening at the health system level, the health provider level, and the individual level: health system structures such as health insurance and care coordination systems, costs, time concerns, provider characteristics including gender of the provider, quality of care issues, medical concerns, and fear. In addition, the following seven barriers and enablers were identified at the health system or provider level as significantly impacting screening for breast cancer: (1) access to insurance, (2) physician recommendation, (3) physician gender, (4) provider characteristics, (5) having a regular provider, (6) fear of the system or procedure, and (7) knowledge of the health system. More specifically, the largest increased odds for having a mammogram was from having insurance, having a physician recommendation, type of provider (mainly gynecologist), and having regular contact with a physician. Clinical breast examinations were increased by having insurance and having regular contact with a physician. The eight studies identified from the MENA region identified barriers to breast cancer screening related to service quality, fear of pain and of cancer itself, female versus male provider, having a physician recommend the screen, cost issues as well as time and convenience of the services. There are a number of system changes that can be made to remove barriers to breast cancer screening. Some of these system changes apply directly to MENA countries. A larger health system assessment of a country is warranted to determine which health system changes should be made to most efficiently and effectively improve access to breast cancer screening.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 228 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 15%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 7%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 6%
Other 42 18%
Unknown 84 37%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 9%
Social Sciences 12 5%
Psychology 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 95 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,643,153
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Public Health (Elsevier)
#462
of 4,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,304
of 354,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health (Elsevier)
#9
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 354,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.