↓ Skip to main content

Childhood cancer research in oxford III: The work of CCRG on ionising radiation

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Cancer, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Childhood cancer research in oxford III: The work of CCRG on ionising radiation
Published in
British Journal of Cancer, August 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41416-018-0182-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerald M. Kendall, John F. Bithell, Kathryn J. Bunch, Gerald J. Draper, Mary E. Kroll, Michael F. G. Murphy, Charles A. Stiller, Tim J. Vincent

Abstract

High doses of ionising radiation are a known cause of childhood cancer and great public and professional interest attaches to possible links between childhood cancer and lower doses, particularly of man-made radiation. This paper describes work done by the Childhood Cancer Research Group (CCRG) on this topic METHODS: Most UK investigations have made use of the National Registry of Childhood Tumours and associated controls. Epidemiological investigations have included national incidence and mortality analyses, geographical investigations, record linkage and case-control studies. Dosimetric studies use biokinetic and dosimetric modelling. This paper reviews the work of the CCRG on the association between exposure to ionising radiation and childhood cancer, 1975-2014. The work of CCRG has been influential in developing understanding of the causes of 'clusters' of childhood cancer and the risks arising from exposure to ionising radiation both natural and man-made. Some clusters around nuclear installations have certainly been observed, but ionising radiation does not seem to be a plausible cause. The group's work has also been instrumental in discounting the hypothesis that paternal preconception irradiation was a cause of childhood cancers and has demonstrated an increased leukaemia risk for children exposed to higher levels of natural gamma-ray radiation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 10 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 21%
Unspecified 5 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 9 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 September 2019.
All research outputs
#5,756,863
of 23,322,258 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Cancer
#4,300
of 10,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,436
of 334,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Cancer
#52
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,563 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 334,344 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 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.