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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Risk of uterine, ovarian and breast cancer following pelvic inflammatory disease: a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-016-2857-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cheng-Che Shen, Li-Yu Hu, Albert C. Yang, Yung-Yen Chiang, Jeng-Hsiu Hung, Shih-Jen Tsai |
| Abstract |
Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is characterized by infection and inflammation of the upper genital tract in women and is associated with health sequelae. We used a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study to explore the relationship between PID and the subsequent development of gynecological cancers including ovarian, breast or uterine cancer. We identified subjects diagnosed with PID between January 1(st), 2000 and December 31(st), 2002 in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. A comparison cohort constructed for patients without PID were matched according to age and sex. All PID patients and control groups were observed until diagnosed with ovarian, breast or uterine cancer, or until death, withdrawal from the NHI system, or until December 31(st), 2009. The PID cohort consisted of 32,268 patients, and an equal number of matched controls without PID. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of ovarian, breast or uterine cancer in subjects with PID were: HR 1.326 (95 % confidence interval: 0.775-2.269), HR: 1.039 (95 % confidence interval: 0.862-1.252), and HR: 1.439 (95 % confidence interval: 0.853-2.426) respectively in comparison with controls during follow-up. This large nationwide population-based cohort study suggests that there is no increased risk for ovarian, breast or uterine cancer among women who have PID compared to a matching population. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 32% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 November 2016.
All research outputs
#19,559,900
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,648
of 8,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,276
of 315,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#68
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,542 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 315,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.