↓ Skip to main content

Trends in Adherence to Recommended Cancer Screening: The US Population and Working Cancer Survivors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Trends in Adherence to Recommended Cancer Screening: The US Population and Working Cancer Survivors
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2012.00190
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tainya C. Clarke, Hosanna Soler-Vila, Lora E. Fleming, Sharon L. Christ, David J. Lee, Kristopher L. Arheart

Abstract

Introduction: Over the past decade the United States (US) has seen a decrease in advanced cancer diagnoses. There has also been an increase in the number of cancer survivors returning to work. Cancer screening behaviors among survivors may play an important role in their return-to-work process. Adherence to a post-treatment cancer screening protocol increases early detection of secondary tumors and reduces potentially limiting side-effects. We compared screening trends among all cancer survivors, working survivors, and the general population over the last decade. Materials and Methods: Trends in adherence to recommended screening were analyzed by site-specific cancer. We used the Healthy People goals as a measure of desired adherence. We selected participants 18+ years from 1997 to 2010 National Health Interview Survey for years where detailed cancer screening information was available. Using the recommendations of the American Cancer Society as a guide, we assessed adherence to cancer screening across the decade. There were 174,393 participants. Analyses included 7,528 working cancer survivors representing 3.8 million US workers, and 119,374 adults representing more than 100 million working Americans with no cancer history. Results: The US population met the Healthy People 2010 goal for colorectal screening, but declined in all other recommended cancer screening. Cancer survivors met and maintained the HP2010 goal for all, except cervical cancer screening. Survivors had higher screening rates than the general population. Among survivors, white-collar and service occupations had higher screening rates than blue-collar survivors. Conclusion: Cancer survivors report higher screening rates than the general population. Nevertheless, national screening rates are lower than desired, and disparities exist by cancer history and occupation. Understanding existing disparities, and the impact of cancer screening on survivors is crucial as the number of working survivors increases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 6%
Germany 1 6%
Unknown 16 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 33%
Professor 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Philosophy 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 2 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 29 January 2013.
All research outputs
#1,400,420
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#239
of 22,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,904
of 250,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#3
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,658 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 250,686 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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.