↓ Skip to main content

Hodgkin lymphoma detection and survival: findings from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network

Overview of attention for article published in BJGP Open, December 2019
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 (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Hodgkin lymphoma detection and survival: findings from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network
Published in
BJGP Open, December 2019
DOI 10.3399/bjgpopen19x101668
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maxine JE Lamb, Eve Roman, Debra A Howell, Eleanor Kane, Timothy Bagguley, Cathy Burton, Russell Patmore, Alexandra G Smith

Abstract

Hodgkin lymphoma is usually detected in primary care with early signs and symptoms, and is highly treatable with standardised chemotherapy. However, late presentation is associated with poorer outcomes. To investigate the relationship between markers of advanced disease, emergency admission, and survival following a diagnosis of classical Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL). The study was set within a sociodemographically representative UK population-based patient cohort of ~4 million, within which all patients were tracked through their care pathways, and linked to national data obtained from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and deaths. All 971 patients with CHL newly diagnosed between 1 September 2004-31 August 2015 were followed until 18th December 2018. The median diagnostic age was 41.5 years (range 0-96 years), 55.2% of the patients were male, 31.2% had stage IV disease, 43.0% had a moderate-high or high risk prognostic score, and 18.7% were admitted via the emergency route prior to diagnosis. The relationship between age and emergency admission was U-shaped: more likely in patients aged <25 years and ≥70 years. Compared to patients admitted via other routes, those presenting as an emergency had more advanced disease and poorer 3-year survival (relative survival 68.4% [95% confidence interval {CI} = 60.3 to 75.2] versus 89.8% [95% CI = 87.0 to 92.0], respectively [P<0.01]). However, after adjusting for clinically important prognostic factors, no difference in survival remained. These findings suggest that CHL survival as a whole could be increased by around 4% if the cancer in patients who presented as an emergency had been detected at the same point as in other patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 15%
Researcher 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unknown 9 69%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 23%
Unknown 10 77%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 16 December 2019.
All research outputs
#4,990,870
of 24,323,543 outputs
Outputs from BJGP Open
#276
of 572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,255
of 467,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BJGP Open
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,323,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 467,063 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.