Title |
Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001216.pub2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Paul Hewitson, Paul P Glasziou, Les Irwig, Bernie Towler, Eila Watson |
Abstract |
Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in the Western world. The human and financial costs of this disease have prompted considerable research efforts to evaluate the ability of screening tests to detect the cancer at an early curable stage. Tests that have been considered for population screening include variants of the faecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) may be achieved by the introduction of population-based screening programmes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
Spain | 2 | 12% |
Japan | 2 | 12% |
Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
Belgium | 1 | 6% |
Unknown | 9 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 15 | 88% |
Scientists | 2 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 499 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
Australia | 2 | <1% |
United States | 2 | <1% |
Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Israel | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
Estonia | 1 | <1% |
Other | 3 | <1% |
Unknown | 482 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 85 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 65 | 13% |
Researcher | 60 | 12% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 42 | 8% |
Other | 103 | 21% |
Unknown | 94 | 19% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 252 | 51% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 3% |
Psychology | 16 | 3% |
Other | 70 | 14% |
Unknown | 100 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. 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 07 May 2023.
All research outputs
#687,642
of 25,501,527 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,280
of 13,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,519
of 174,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,501,527 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 13,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 174,153 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 99% 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.