↓ Skip to main content

Symptoms and other factors associated with time to diagnosis and stage of lung cancer: a prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Cancer, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Symptoms and other factors associated with time to diagnosis and stage of lung cancer: a prospective cohort study
Published in
British Journal of Cancer, March 2015
DOI 10.1038/bjc.2015.30
Pubmed ID
Authors

F M Walter, G Rubin, C Bankhead, H C Morris, N Hall, K Mills, C Dobson, R C Rintoul, W Hamilton, J Emery

Abstract

Background:This prospective cohort study aimed to identify symptom and patient factors that influence time to lung cancer diagnosis and stage at diagnosis.Methods:Data relating to symptoms were collected from patients upon referral with symptoms suspicious of lung cancer in two English regions; we also examined primary care and hospital records for diagnostic routes and diagnoses. Descriptive and regression analyses were used to investigate associations between symptoms and patient factors with diagnostic intervals and stage.Results:Among 963 participants, 15.9% were diagnosed with primary lung cancer, 5.9% with other thoracic malignancies and 78.2% with non-malignant conditions. Only half the cohort had an isolated first symptom (475, 49.3%); synchronous first symptoms were common. Haemoptysis, reported by 21.6% of cases, was the only initial symptom associated with cancer. Diagnostic intervals were shorter for cancer than non-cancer diagnoses (91 vs 124 days, P=0.037) and for late-stage than early-stage cancer (106 vs 168 days, P=0.02). Chest/shoulder pain was the only first symptom with a shorter diagnostic interval for cancer compared with non-cancer diagnoses (P=0.003).Conclusions:Haemoptysis is the strongest symptom predictor of lung cancer but occurs in only a fifth of patients. Programmes for expediting earlier diagnosis need to focus on multiple symptoms and their evolution.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 3 March 2015; doi:10.1038/bjc.2015.30 www.bjcancer.com.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Unspecified 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Researcher 15 13%
Other 33 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 47%
Unspecified 27 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 17 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 10 March 2015.
All research outputs
#479,509
of 4,855,454 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Cancer
#562
of 2,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,435
of 145,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Cancer
#91
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,855,454 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 145,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.