↓ 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
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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

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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 7 19%
Unspecified 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 4 11%
Other 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 43%
Unspecified 9 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 16%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 3 8%

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
#241,292
of 12,981,426 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#105
of 2,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,867
of 293,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#1
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,981,426 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 2,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 293,851 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 98% of its contemporaries.