↓ Skip to main content

“I don’t know” My Cancer Risk: Implications for Health Behavior Engagement

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, March 2016
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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
“I don’t know” My Cancer Risk: Implications for Health Behavior Engagement
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12160-016-9789-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erika A. Waters, Marc T. Kiviniemi, Heather Orom, Jennifer L. Hay

Abstract

Many people report uncertainty about their cancer risk. We examined whether such uncertainty was related to cancer prevention and detection behaviors. National Health Interview Survey data from 2005 to 2010 were analyzed. Participants reported their perceived risk for colorectal and breast cancers. Responses were coded as "valid" (i.e., less/as/more likely than average) or "don't know." In bivariate analyses for both cancer sites and survey years, "don't know" responders (DKR) engaged in less physical activity than "valid" responders (p < 0.05). DKR had lower mammography adherence than "valid" responders in 2005 and lower colorectal screening adherence in 2010 (p < 0.05). DKR had marginally lower colorectal screening adherence and fruit/vegetable consumption in 2005 (p < 0.06). Multivariable models indicated that the DKR-behavior relationship could be largely accounted for by education. Interventions that help people understand their cancer risk may provide particular benefit to people with low education and might consequently reduce health disparities.

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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 18%
Psychology 7 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 17 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 March 2016.
All research outputs
#13,460,530
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#926
of 1,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,517
of 298,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#18
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,389 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 298,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.