| Title |
Population-Based Precision Cancer Screening: A Symposium on Evidence, Epidemiology, and Next Steps
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0555 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pamela M. Marcus, Nora Pashayan, Timothy R. Church, V. Paul Doria-Rose, Michael K. Gould, Rebecca A. Hubbard, Michael Marrone, Diana L. Miglioretti, Paul D. Pharoah, Paul F. Pinsky, Katherine A. Rendle, Hilary A. Robbins, Megan C. Roberts, Betsy Rolland, Mark Schiffman, Jasmin A. Tiro, Ann G. Zauber, Deborah M. Winn, Muin J. Khoury |
| Abstract |
Precision medicine, an emerging approach for disease treatment that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle, is under consideration for preventive interventions, including cancer screening. On September 29, 2015, the National Cancer Institute sponsored a symposium entitled "Precision Cancer Screening in the General Population: Evidence, Epidemiology, and Next Steps". The goal was two-fold: to share current information on the evidence, practices, and challenges surrounding precision screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers, and to allow for in-depth discussion among experts in relevant fields regarding how epidemiology and other population sciences can be used to generate evidence to inform precision screening strategies. Attendees concluded that the strength of evidence for efficacy and effectiveness of precision strategies varies by cancer site, that no one research strategy or methodology would be able or appropriate to address the many knowledge gaps in precision screening, and that issues surrounding implementation must be researched as well. Additional discussion needs to occur to identify the high priority research areas in precision cancer screening for pertinent organs and to gather the necessary evidence to determine whether further implementation of precision cancer screening strategies in the general population would be feasible and beneficial. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 65 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,697,448
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#1,052
of 4,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,813
of 318,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#13
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. 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 318,637 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 63% of its contemporaries.