| Title |
Recommendations for implementing stereotactic radiotherapy in peripheral stage IA non-small cell lung cancer: report from the Quality Assurance Working Party of the randomised phase III ROSEL study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, January 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-717x-4-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Coen W Hurkmans, Johan P Cuijpers, Frank J Lagerwaard, Joachim Widder, Uulke A van der Heide, Danny Schuring, Suresh Senan |
| Abstract |
A phase III multi-centre randomised trial (ROSEL) has been initiated to establish the role of stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with operable stage IA lung cancer. Due to rapid changes in radiotherapy technology and evolving techniques for image-guided delivery, guidelines had to be developed in order to ensure uniformity in implementation of stereotactic radiotherapy in this multi-centre study. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 50% |
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Belgium | 2 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 206 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 42 | 19% |
| Researcher | 40 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 50 | 23% |
| Unknown | 33 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 97 | 45% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 49 | 23% |
| Engineering | 6 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 42 | 19% |
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 20 December 2015.
All research outputs
#13,375,947
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#649
of 2,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,045
of 169,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 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 2,046 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 169,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them