↓ Skip to main content

Profiling for primary-care presentation, investigation and referral for liver cancers

Overview of attention for article published in European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Profiling for primary-care presentation, investigation and referral for liver cancers
Published in
European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, December 2015
DOI 10.1097/meg.0000000000000555
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel L. Hughes, Richard D. Neal, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Greg Rubin

Abstract

The incidence of liver cancer across Europe is increasing. There is a lack of evidence within the current literature on the identification and investigation of liver cancer within primary care. We aimed to profile liver cancer recognition and assessment as well as the timeliness of liver cancer diagnosis from within the primary-care setting in the UK. Data were obtained from the National Audit of Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care 2009-2010 and analysed. We calculated the patient interval, the primary-care interval and the number of prereferral consultations for liver cancer. We then compared these data with prior data on the respective indicators for other common cancers. The median patient interval was 9 days (interquartile range 0-31 days), and the median primary-care interval for liver cancer was 11 days (interquartile range 0-40 days). Of the 90 patients, 21 (23.3%) had three or more consultations with their general practitioner before specialist referral. For the three metrics (patient interval, primary-care interval and number of prereferral consultations), liver cancer has average or longer intervals when compared with other cancers. The most common symptomatic presentation of liver cancer within the primary-care setting was right upper quadrant pain (11%), followed by decompensated liver failure (9%). Of the patients, 12% were diagnosed with liver cancer on the basis of an incidental finding of an abnormal liver function test. This study provides a detailed and thorough overview of the recognition of liver cancer and the promptness of liver cancer identification in an English context, and should inform strategies for improving the timeliness of diagnosis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 36%
Researcher 2 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Other 1 9%
Professor 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Unspecified 3 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Psychology 1 9%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Other 1 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2017.
All research outputs
#10,968,323
of 12,372,326 outputs
Outputs from European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology
#1,397
of 1,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,440
of 341,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology
#36
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,587 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 341,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.