↓ Skip to main content

Selection of men for investigation of possible testicular cancer in primary care: a large case–control study using electronic patient records

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 2,494)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
74 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2 Mendeley
Title
Selection of men for investigation of possible testicular cancer in primary care: a large case–control study using electronic patient records
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, July 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x697949
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth A Shephard, William T Hamilton

Abstract

Testicular cancer incidence has risen over the last two decades and is expected to continue to rise. There are no primary care studies on the clinical features of testicular cancer, with recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance based solely upon clinical consensus. To identify clinical features of testicular cancer and to quantify their risk in primary care patients, with the aim of improving the selection of patients for investigation. A matched case-control study in males aged ≥17 years, using Clinical Practice Research Datalink records. Putative clinical features of testicular cancer were identified and analysed using conditional logistic regression. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated for those aged <50 years. In all, 1398 cases were available, diagnosed between 2000 and 2012, with 4956 age-, sex-, and practice-matched controls. Nine features were independently associated with testicular cancer, the top three being testicular swelling (odds ratio [OR] 280, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 110 to 690), testicular lump (OR 270, 95% CI = 100 to 740), and scrotal swelling (OR 170, 95% CI = 35 to 800). The highest PPV for 17-49-year-olds was testicular lump, at 2.5% (95% CI = 1.1 to 5.6). Combining testicular lump with testicular swelling or testicular pain produced PPVs of 17% and 10%, respectively. Testicular enlargement carries a risk of cancer of 2.5% - close to the current 3% threshold in UK referral guidance. Contrary to traditional teaching, painful testicular enlargement may signify cancer. Some initial hydrocele diagnoses appear to be wrong, with missed cancers, suggesting an ultrasound may be useful when a hydrocele diagnosis is uncertain. These results support the existing NICE guidelines, and help to characterise when an ultrasound should be considered in symptomatic men.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 1 50%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 100%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 594. 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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#9,107
of 12,129,026 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#6
of 2,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#529
of 245,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#1
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,129,026 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,494 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 245,852 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.