↓ Skip to main content

Life tables for global surveillance of cancer survival (the CONCORD programme): data sources and methods

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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.
Title
Life tables for global surveillance of cancer survival (the CONCORD programme): data sources and methods
Published in
BMC Cancer, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3117-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Devon Spika, Finian Bannon, Audrey Bonaventure, Laura M Woods, Rhea Harewood, Helena Carreira, Michel P Coleman, Claudia Allemani

Abstract

We set out to estimate net survival trends for 10 common cancers in 279 cancer registry populations in 67 countries around the world, as part of the CONCORD-2 study. Net survival can be interpreted as the proportion of cancer patients who survive up to a given time, after eliminating the impact of mortality from other causes (background mortality). Background mortality varies widely between populations and over time. It was therefore necessary to construct robust life tables that accurately reflected the background mortality in each of the registry populations. Life tables of all-cause mortality rates by single year of age and sex were constructed by calendar year for each population and, when possible, by racial or ethnic sub-groups. We used three different approaches, based on the type of mortality data available from each registry. With death and population counts, we adopted a flexible multivariable modelling approach. With unsmoothed mortality rates, we used the Ewbank relational method. Where no data were available from the registry or a national statistical office, we used the abridged UN Population Division life tables and interpolated these using the Elandt-Johnson method. We also investigated the impact of using state- and race-specific life tables versus national race-specific life tables on estimates of net survival from four adult cancers in the United States (US). We constructed 6,514 life tables covering 327 populations. Wide variations in life expectancy at birth and mortality by age were observed, even within countries. During 1995-99, life expectancy was lowest in Nigeria and highest in Japan, ranging from 47 to 84 years among females and 46 to 78 years among males. During 2005-09, life expectancy was lowest in Lesotho and again highest in Japan, ranging from 45 to 86 years among females and 45 to 80 years among males. For the US, estimates of net survival differed by up to 4% if background mortality was fully controlled with state- and race-specific life tables, rather than with national race-specific life tables. Background mortality varies worldwide. This emphasises the importance of using population-specific life tables for geographic and international comparisons of net survival.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Student > Master 3 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Unspecified 3 21%
Mathematics 2 14%
Philosophy 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,117,701
of 12,612,351 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,741
of 4,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,554
of 253,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,612,351 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,659 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 253,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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