↓ Skip to main content

Decision making and referral from primary care for possible lung and colorectal cancer: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#12 of 1,246)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Decision making and referral from primary care for possible lung and colorectal cancer: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, December 2014
DOI 10.3399/bjgp14x682849
Pubmed ID
Authors

Banks J, Walter FM, Hall N, Mills K, Hamilton W, Turner KM, J. Banks, F. M. Walter, N. Hall, K. Mills, W. Hamilton, K. M. Turner, Jon Banks, Fiona M Walter, Nicola Hall, Katie Mills, William Hamilton, Katrina M Turner

Abstract

The challenge for GPs when assessing whether to refer a patient for cancer investigation is that many cancer symptoms are also caused by benign self-limiting illness. UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) referral guidelines emphasise that the patient should be involved in the decision-making process and be informed of the reasons for referral. Research to date, however, has not examined the extent to which these guidelines are borne out in practice.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 6 20%
Unspecified 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 47%
Unspecified 7 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 22 December 2014.
All research outputs
#58,629
of 4,681,163 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#12
of 1,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,762
of 156,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#2
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,681,163 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 156,641 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.