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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Decision-Making in the Surgical Treatment of Breast Cancer: Factors Influencing Women’s Choices for Mastectomy and Breast Conserving Surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2016.00074 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily Catherine Bellavance, Susan Beth Kesmodel |
| Abstract |
One of the most difficult decisions a woman can be faced with when choosing breast cancer treatment is whether or not to undergo breast conserving surgery or mastectomy. The factors that influence these treatment decisions are complex and involve issues regarding access to health care, concerns for cancer recurrence, and the impact of surgery on body image and sexuality. Understanding these factors will help practitioners to improve patient education and to better guide patients through this decision-making process. Although significant scientific and societal advances have been made in improving women's choices for the breast cancer treatment, there are still deficits in the decision-making processes surrounding the surgical treatment of breast cancer. Further research is needed to define optimal patient education and shared decision-making practices in this area. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 46% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 77% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 23% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 128 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 40 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 42 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,223,742
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#498
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,714
of 315,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#2
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 315,344 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 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 97% of its contemporaries.