| Title |
Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Outcomes in a Low‐Volume, Specialised Hepato Pancreato Biliary Unit
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-013-2431-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H. A. Kanhere, M. I. Trochsler, M. H. Kanhere, A. N. Lord, G. J. Maddern |
| Abstract |
This study was designed to evaluate the outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) at a low-volume specialised Hepato Pancreato Biliary (HPB) unit. Volume outcome analyses show significantly better results for patients undergoing PD at high-volume centres (Begg et al. JAMA 280:1747-1751, 1998; Finlayson et al. Arch Surg 138:721-725, 2003; Birkmeyer et al. N Engl J Med 346:1128-1137, 2002; Gouma et al. Ann Surg 232:786-795, 2000). Centralisation of PD seems to be the logical conclusion to be drawn from these results. In countries like Australia with a small and widely dispersed population, centralisation may not be always feasible. Alternative strategy would be to have similar systems in place to those in high-volume centres to achieve similar results at low-volume centres. Many Australian tertiary care centres perform low to medium volumes of PD (Chen et al. HPB 12:101-108, 2010; Kwok et al. ANZ J Surg 80:605-608, 2010; Barnett and Collier ANZ J Surg 76:563-568, 2006; Samra et al. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 10:415-421, 2011). Most of these have a specialised HPB unit, accredited by the Australia and New Zealand Hepatic pancreatic and biliary association (ANZHPBA), as training units for post fellowship training in HPB surgery. It is imperative to perform outcome-based analyses in these units to ensure safety and high quality of care. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 11% |
| Austria | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 16% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 63% |
| Engineering | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,514,862
of 23,607,611 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#1,459
of 4,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,344
of 307,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#12
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,607,611 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,328 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 307,887 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.