↓ Skip to main content

A Community Coalition to Address Cancer Disparities: Transitions, Successes and Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Education, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
A Community Coalition to Address Cancer Disparities: Transitions, Successes and Challenges
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s13187-014-0746-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vetta L. Sanders Thompson, Bettina Drake, Aimee S. James, Monique Norfolk, Melody Goodman, Leon Ashford, Sherrill Jackson, Miranda Witherspoon, Mikki Brewster, Graham Colditz

Abstract

Community-based participatory (CBP) strategies are considered important to efforts to eliminate disparities. This paper outlines how the Program for the Elimination of Cancer Disparities (PECaD) uses CBP strategies as a part of a long-term cancer education, prevention, and control strategy in an urban community. Community partnerships have proved to be vital resources to inform PECaD's agenda and the research practice of academic partners. We begin with a description of PECaD governance and partnership structures. The paper then describes programmatic activities and successes, including efforts to monitor clinical trials, deployment of mammography resources, anti-smoking, and prostate and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening education. The influence of changes in funding priorities, preventive screening policy, and community partner development on the partnership process over time is discussed. PECaD community partners have grown and expanded beyond the Program's mission and developed additional partnerships, resulting in a reevaluation of relationships. The impact of these external and internal changes and pressures on the partnerships are noted. The evolution of the evaluation process and what it has revealed about needed improvements in PECaD activities and operations is presented. A summary of the lessons learned and their implications for CBP practice are provided.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 18%
Researcher 10 18%
Librarian 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 13 24%
Unknown 12 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 18%
Mathematics 4 7%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 13 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,274,726
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#219
of 1,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,249
of 260,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,128 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 260,456 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.