↓ Skip to main content

Developing National Cancer Registration in Developing Countries – Case Study of the Nigerian National System of Cancer Registries

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Developing National Cancer Registration in Developing Countries – Case Study of the Nigerian National System of Cancer Registries
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00186
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elima E. Jedy-Agba, Emmanuel A. Oga, Michael Odutola, Yusuf M. Abdullahi, Abiodun Popoola, Peter Achara, Enoch Afolayan, Adekunbiola Aina Fehintola Banjo, Ima-Obong Ekanem, Olagoke Erinomo, Emmanuel Ezeome, Festus Igbinoba, Christopher Obiorah, Olufemi Ogunbiyi, Abidemi Omonisi, Clement Osime, Cornelius Ukah, Patience Osinubi, Ramatu Hassan, William Blattner, Patrick Dakum, Clement A. Adebamowo

Abstract

The epidemiological transition in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has given rise to a concomitant increase in the incidence of non-communicable diseases including cancers. Worldwide, cancer registries have been shown to be critical for the determination of cancer burden, conduct of research, and in the planning and implementation of cancer control measures. Cancer registration though vital is often neglected in SSA owing to competing demands for resources for healthcare. We report the implementation of a system for representative nation-wide cancer registration in Nigeria - the Nigerian National System of Cancer Registries (NSCR). The NSCR coordinates the activities of cancer registries in Nigeria, strengthens existing registries, establishes new registries, complies and analyses data, and makes these freely available to researchers and policy makers. We highlight the key challenges encountered in implementing this strategy and how they were overcome. This report serves as a guide for other low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) wishing to expand cancer registration coverage in their countries and highlights the training, mentoring, scientific and logistic support, and advocacy that are crucial to sustaining cancer registration programs in LMIC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 127 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Postgraduate 14 11%
Other 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 31 24%
Unknown 22 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 11 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 33 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,420,033
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,675
of 9,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,084
of 263,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#35
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,830 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 263,145 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.