| Title |
Consensus guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with pancreatic cancer in Spain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Oncology, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12094-016-1594-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Hidalgo, R. Álvarez, J. Gallego, C. Guillén-Ponce, B. Laquente, T. Macarulla, A. Muñoz, M. Salgado, R. Vera, J. Adeva, I. Alés, S. Arévalo, J. Blázquez, A. Calsina, A. Carmona, E. de Madaria, R. Díaz, L. Díez, T. Fernández, B. G. de Paredes, M. E. Gallardo, I. González, O. Hernando, P. Jiménez, A. López, C. López, F. López-Ríos, E. Martín, J. Martínez, A. Martínez, J. Montans, R. Pazo, J. C. Plaza, I. Peiró, J. J. Reina, A. Sanjuanbenito, R. Yaya, Alfredo Carrato |
| Abstract |
The management of patients with pancreatic cancer has advanced over the last few years. We convey a multidisciplinary group of experts in an attempt to stablish practical guidelines for the diagnoses, staging and management of these patients. This paper summarizes the main conclusions of the working group. Patients with suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be rapidly evaluated and referred to high-volume centers. Multidisciplinary supervision is critical for proper diagnoses, staging and to frame a treatment plan. Surgical resection together with chemotherapy offers the highest chance for cure in early stage disease. Patients with advanced disease should be classified in treatment groups to guide systemic treatment. New chemotherapeutic regimens have resulted in improved survival. Symptomatic management is critical in this disease. Enrollment in a clinical trial is, in general, recommended. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 10 | 59% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 14% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Researcher | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 16% |
| Unknown | 34 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 54 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 36 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,701,604
of 23,870,803 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#90
of 1,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,394
of 425,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#5
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,870,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,384 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 425,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.