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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Is community treatment best? a randomised trial comparing delivery of cancer treatment in the hospital, home and GP surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Cancer, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/bjc.2013.414 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
P G Corrie, A M Moody, G Armstrong, S Nolasco, S-H Lao-Sirieix, L Bavister, A T Prevost, R Parker, R Sabes-Figuera, P McCrone, H Balsdon, K McKinnon, A Hounsell, B O'Sullivan, S Barclay |
| Abstract |
Care closer to home is being explored as a means of improving patient experience as well as efficiency in terms of cost savings. Evidence that community cancer services improve care quality and/or generate cost savings is currently limited. A randomised study was undertaken to compare delivery of cancer treatment in the hospital with two different community settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 112 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 17% |
| Researcher | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Librarian | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 16% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 12% |
| Psychology | 9 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 14% |
| Unknown | 35 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,790,312
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Cancer
#4,641
of 10,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,010
of 199,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Cancer
#68
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 199,980 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 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 53% of its contemporaries.