↓ Skip to main content

Use of mobile telemedicine for cervical cancer screening

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, May 2011
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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
173 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
Use of mobile telemedicine for cervical cancer screening
Published in
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, May 2011
DOI 10.1258/jtt.2011.101008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Visual inspection of the cervix with application of 4% acetic acid (VIA) is an inexpensive alternative to cytology-based screening in areas where resources are limited, such as in many developing countries. We have examined the diagnostic agreement between off-site (remote) expert diagnosis using photographs of the cervix (photographic inspection with acetic acid, PIA) and in-person VIA. The images for remote evaluation were taken with a mobile phone and transmitted by MMS. The study population consisted of 95 HIV-positive women in Gaborone, Botswana. An expert gynaecologist made a definitive positive or negative reading on the PIA results of 64 out of the 95 women whose PIA images were also read by the nurse midwives. The remaining 31 PIA images were deemed insufficient in quality for a reading by the expert gynaecologist. The positive nurse PIA readings were concordant with the positive expert PIA readings in 82% of cases, and the negative PIA readings between the two groups were fully concordant in 89% of cases. These results suggest that mobile telemedicine may be useful to improve access of women in remote areas to cervical cancer screening utilizing the VIA 'see-and-treat' method.

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 173 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 %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 171 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 15%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 9 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 39 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 8%
Social Sciences 11 6%
Computer Science 10 6%
Psychology 7 4%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 44 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 01 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,281,762
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
#152
of 1,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,081
of 124,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,334 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 124,584 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them