| Title |
Research opportunities in intraoperative radiation therapy: the next decade 2013–2023
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Oncology, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12094-013-1019-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. A. Calvo, C. V. Sole, M. E. González, E. D. Tangco, J. López-Tarjuelo, I. Koubychine, J. A. Santos, J. Pascau, R. Herranz, C. Ferrer |
| Abstract |
The reality of intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) practice is consistent with an efficient and highly precise radiation therapy technique to safely boost areas at risk for local recurrence. Long-term clinical experience has shown that IORT-containing multi-modality regimens appear to improve local disease control, if not survival in many diseases. Research with IORT is a multidisciplinary scenario that covers knowledge from radiation beam adapted development to advance molecular biology for bio-predictability of outcome. The technical parameters employed in IORT procedures are important information to be recorded for quality assurance and clinical results analysis. In addition, specific treatment planning systems for IORT procedures are available, to help in the treatment decision-making process. A systematic revision of opportunities for research and innovation in IORT is reported including radiation beam modulation, delivery, dosimetry and planning; infrastructure and treatment factors; experimental and clinical radiobiology; clinical trials, innovation and translational research development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 20% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 10% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Librarian | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 32% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 15% |
| Engineering | 4 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 September 2013.
All research outputs
#4,485,473
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#184
of 1,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,120
of 194,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,288 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 194,759 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 90% of its contemporaries.