↓ Skip to main content

Committee Opinion No. 716 Summary: The Role of the Obstetrician–Gynecologist in the Early Detection of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in Women at Average Risk

Overview of attention for article published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Committee Opinion No. 716 Summary: The Role of the Obstetrician–Gynecologist in the Early Detection of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in Women at Average Risk
Published in
Obstetrics & Gynecology, September 2017
DOI 10.1097/aog.0000000000002289
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Ovarian cancer is the second most common type of female reproductive cancer, and more women die from ovarian cancer than from cervical cancer and uterine cancer combined. Currently, there is no strategy for early detection of ovarian cancer that reduces ovarian cancer mortality. Taking a detailed personal and family history for breast, gynecologic, and colon cancer facilitates categorizing women based on their risk (average risk or high risk) of developing epithelial ovarian cancer. Women with a strong family history of ovarian, breast, or colon cancer may have hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (BRCA mutation) or hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome), and these women are at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women with these conditions should be referred for formal genetic counseling to better assess their cancer risk, including their risk of ovarian cancer. If appropriate, these women may be offered additional testing for early detection of ovarian cancer. The use of transvaginal ultrasonography and tumor markers (such as cancer antigen 125), alone or in combination, for the early detection of ovarian cancer in average-risk women have not been proved to reduce mortality, and harms exist from invasive diagnostic testing (eg, surgery) resulting from false-positive test results. The patient and her obstetrician-gynecologist should maintain an appropriate level of suspicion when potentially relevant signs and symptoms of ovarian cancer are present.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Researcher 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%

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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#8,417,145
of 16,110,865 outputs
Outputs from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#4,991
of 7,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,884
of 274,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obstetrics & Gynecology
#85
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,110,865 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,078 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 274,289 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 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.