| Title |
Family history and the natural history of colorectal cancer: systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics in Medicine, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/gim.2014.188 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nora B. Henrikson, Elizabeth M. Webber, Katrina A. Goddard, Aaron Scrol, Margaret Piper, Marc S. Williams, Doris T. Zallen, Ned Calonge, Theodore G. Ganiats, A. Cecile J.W. Janssens, Ann Zauber, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Marjolein van Ballegooijen, Evelyn P. Whitlock |
| Abstract |
Purpose:Family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a known risk factor for CRC and encompasses both genetic and shared environmental risks.Methods:We conducted a systematic review to estimate the impact of family history on the natural history of CRC and adherence to screening.Results:We found high heterogeneity in family-history definitions, the most common definition being one or more first-degree relatives. The prevalence of family history may be lower than the commonly cited 10%, and confirms evidence for increasing levels of risk associated with increasing family-history burden. There is evidence for higher prevalence of adenomas and of multiple adenomas in people with family history of CRC but no evidence for differential adenoma location or adenoma progression by family history. Limited data regarding the natural history of CRC by family history suggest a differential age or stage at cancer diagnosis and mixed evidence with respect to tumor location. Adherence to recommended colonoscopy screening was higher in people with a family history of CRC.Conclusion:Stratification based on polygenic and/or multifactorial risk assessment may mature to the point of displacing family history-based approaches, but for the foreseeable future, family history may remain a valuable clinical tool for identifying individuals at increased risk for CRC.Genet Med advance online publication 15 January 2015Genetics in Medicine (2015); doi:10.1038/gim.2014.188. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 57% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 270 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 270 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 10% |
| Researcher | 20 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 49 | 18% |
| Unknown | 81 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 36 | 13% |
| Unknown | 89 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 07 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,832,694
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#629
of 2,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,844
of 377,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#11
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 2,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 377,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 73% of its contemporaries.