↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Program: current perspectives on strategies for improvement

Overview of attention for article published in Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, December 2017
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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
Title
The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Program: current perspectives on strategies for improvement
Published in
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, December 2017
DOI 10.2147/rmhp.s109116
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Koo, Laura Jane Neilson, Christian Von Wagner, Colin John Rees

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the UK. The English National Health Service (NHS) Bowel Cancer Screening Program (BCSP) was introduced in 2006 to improve CRC mortality by earlier detection of CRC. It is now offered to patients aged 60-74 years and involves a home-based guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBt) biennially, and if positive, patients are offered a colonoscopy. This has been associated with a 15% reduction in mortality. In 2013, an additional arm to BCSP was introduced, Bowelscope. This offers patients aged 55 years a one-off flexible sigmoidoscopy, and if several adenomas are found, the patients are offered a completion colonoscopy. BCSP has been associated with a significant stage shift in CRC diagnosis; however, the uptake of bowel cancer screening remains lower than that for other screening programs. Further work is required to understand the reasons for nonparticipation of patients to ensure optimal uptake. A change of gFOBt kit to the fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) in the English BCSP may further increase patient participation. This, in addition to increased yield of neoplasia and cancers with the FIT kit, is likely to further improve CRC outcomes in the screened population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 177 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 42 24%
Researcher 18 10%
Student > Master 16 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 55 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 67 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 24 November 2022.
All research outputs
#3,452,687
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#107
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,234
of 446,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 446,259 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them