| Title |
Procedures and recommended times in the care process of the patient with pancreatic cancer: PAN-TIME consensus between scientific societies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Oncology, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12094-016-1609-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Vera, A. Ferrández, C. J. Ferrer, C. Flores, C. Joaquín, S. López, T. Martín, E. Martín, M. Marzo, A. Sarrión, E. Vaquero, A. Zapatero, J. Aparicio |
| Abstract |
Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a disease with bad prognosis. It is usually diagnosed at advanced stages and its treatment is complex. The aim of this consensus document was to provide recommendations by experts that would ameliorate PC diagnosis, reduce the time to treatment, and optimize PC management by interdisciplinary teams. As a consensus method, we followed the modified Delphi methodology. A scientific committee of experts provided 40 statements that were submitted in two rounds to a panel of 87 specialists of 12 scientific societies. Agreement was reached for 39 of the 40 proposed statements (97.5%). Although a screening of the asymptomatic population is not a feasible option, special attention to potential symptoms during primary care could ameliorate early diagnostic. It is especially important to decrease the period until diagnostic tests are performed. This consensus could improve survival in PC patients by decreasing the time to diagnose and time to treatment and by the implementation of multidisciplinary teams. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 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 | 18 | 43% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 2 | 5% |
| Colombia | 2 | 5% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 16 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 31 | 74% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 17% |
| Scientists | 4 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 26% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 12% |
| Psychology | 3 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 11 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,302,665
of 24,138,997 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#31
of 1,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,458
of 424,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,138,997 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,387 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 424,831 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 95% of its contemporaries.