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 |
Anticipated regret to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Scotland (ARTICS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-849 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ronan E O’Carroll, Robert JC Steele, Gillian Libby, Linda Brownlee, Julie A Chambers |
| Abstract |
Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the UK. Screening is key to early detection. The Scottish programme of colorectal cancer screening is running successfully, and involves all adults aged between 50 and 74 years being invited to post back a faecal sample for testing every 2 years. However, screening uptake is sub-optimal: for example rates for the period November 2009 to October 2011 ranged from just 39% for males living in the most deprived areas to 67% for least deprived females. Recent research has shown that asking people to consider the emotional consequences of not participating in screening (anticipated regret) can lead to a significant increase in screening uptake. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Peru | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 27% |
| Psychology | 6 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 23 | 28% |
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 18 September 2013.
All research outputs
#13,695,328
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,862
of 14,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,077
of 179,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#211
of 298 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 179,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 298 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.