↓ Skip to main content

Impact of travel time and rurality on presentation and outcomes of symptomatic colorectal cancer: a cross-sectional cohort study in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Impact of travel time and rurality on presentation and outcomes of symptomatic colorectal cancer: a cross-sectional cohort study in primary care
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, June 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x691349
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peninah Murage, Peter Murchie, Max Bachmann, Michael Crawford, Andy Jones

Abstract

Several studies have reported a survival disadvantage for rural dwellers who develop colorectal cancer, but the underlying mechanisms remain obscure. Delayed presentation to GPs may be a contributory factor, but evidence is lacking. To examine the association between rurality and travel time on diagnosis and survival of colorectal cancer in a cohort from northeast Scotland. The authors used a database linking GP records to routine data for patients diagnosed between 1997 and 1998, and followed up to 2011. Primary outcomes were alarm symptoms, emergency admissions, stage, and survival. Travel time in minutes from patients to GP was estimated. Logistic and Cox regression were used to model outcomes. Interaction terms were used to determine if travelling time impacted differently on urban versus rural patients. Rural patients and patients travelling farther to the GP had better 3-year survival. When the travel outcome associations were explored using interaction terms, the associations differed between rural and urban areas. Longer travel in urban areas significantly reduced the odds of emergency admissions (odds ratio [OR] 0.62, P<0.05), and increased survival (hazard ratio 0.75, P<0.05). Longer travel also increased the odds of presenting with alarm symptoms in urban areas; this was nearly significant (OR 1.34, P = 0.06). Presence of alarm symptoms reduced the likelihood of emergency admissions (OR 0.36, P<0.01). Living in a rural area, and travelling farther to a GP in urban areas, may reduce the likelihood of emergency admissions and poor survival. This may be related to how patients present with alarm symptoms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 17%
Researcher 6 17%
Other 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 14 39%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. 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 12 November 2020.
All research outputs
#322,762
of 16,920,965 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#135
of 3,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,794
of 276,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#12
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,920,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,592 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 276,825 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.