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 |
Health Disparities and Cancer: Racial Disparities in Cancer Mortality in the United States, 2000–2010
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00051 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eileen B. O’Keefe, Jeremy P. Meltzer, Traci N. Bethea |
| Abstract |
Declining cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States (U.S.) have continued through the first decade of the twenty-first century. Reductions in tobacco use, greater uptake of prevention measures, adoption of early detection methods, and improved treatments have resulted in improved outcomes for both men and women. However, Black Americans continue to have the higher cancer mortality rates and shorter survival times. This review discusses and compares the cancer mortality rates and mortality trends for Blacks and Whites. The complex relationship between socioeconomic status and race and its contribution to racial cancer disparities is discussed. Based on current trends and the potential and limitations of the patient protection and affordable care act with its mandate to reduce health care inequities, future trends, and challenges in cancer mortality disparities in the U.S. are explored. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 13% |
| Researcher | 24 | 11% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 47 | 21% |
| Unknown | 50 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 4% |
| Psychology | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 39 | 17% |
| Unknown | 59 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 01 January 2023.
All research outputs
#545,285
of 25,099,766 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#269
of 13,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,371
of 269,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#3
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,099,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. 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 269,779 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 97% 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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.