↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The burden of cancer risk in Canada's indigenous population: a comparative study of known risks in a Canadian region

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of General Medicine, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
The burden of cancer risk in Canada's indigenous population: a comparative study of known risks in a Canadian region
Published in
International Journal of General Medicine, October 2011
DOI 10.2147/ijgm.s24292
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenda Elias, Erich V Kliewer, Madelyn Hall, Alain A Demers, Donna Turner, Patricia Martens, Say P Hong, Lyna Hart, Caroline Chartrand, Garry Munro

Abstract

Canadian First Nations, the largest of the Aboriginal groups in Canada, have had lower cancer incidence and mortality rates than non-Aboriginal populations in the past. This pattern is changing with increased life expectancy, a growing population, and a poor social environment that influences risk behaviors, metabolic conditions, and disparities in screening uptake. These factors alone do not fully explain differences in cancer risk between populations, as genetic susceptibility and environmental factors also have significant influence. However, genetics and environment are difficult to modify. This study compared modifiable behavioral risk factors and metabolic-associated conditions for men and women, and cancer screening practices of women, between First Nations living on-reserve and a non-First Nations Manitoba rural population (Canada).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 23%
Student > Bachelor 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 32 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Social Sciences 11 11%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 37 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 January 2012.
All research outputs
#14,278,325
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#467
of 1,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,467
of 143,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 143,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.