↓ Skip to main content

Sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Colorectal Disease, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#48 of 1,942)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery
Published in
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00384-017-2826-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

V Celentano, R Cohen, J Warusavitarne, O Faiz, M Chand

Abstract

Sexual and urological problems after surgery for rectal cancer are common, multifactorial, inadequately discussed, and untreated. The urogenital function is dependent on dual autonomic sympathetic and parasympathetic innervation, and four key danger zones exist that are at risk for nerve damage during colorectal surgery: one of these sites is in the abdomen and three are in the pelvis. The aim of this study is to systematically review the epidemiology of sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery, to describe the anatomical basis of autonomic nerve-preserving techniques, and to explore the scientific evidence available to support the laparoscopic or robotic approach over open surgery. According to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search of studies evaluating sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery for cancer was performed in Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials. An increasing number of studies assessing the incidence and prevalence of sexual dysfunction following multimodality treatment for rectal cancer has been published over the last 30 years. Significant heterogeneity in the prevalence of sexual dysfunction is reported in the literature, with rates between 5 and 90%. There is no evidence to date in favor of any surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic). Standardized diagnostic tools should be routinely used to prospectively assess sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 22 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 52%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Linguistics 1 1%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 29 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 21 December 2020.
All research outputs
#2,321,534
of 25,603,577 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#48
of 1,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,192
of 325,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,603,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,942 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. 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 325,985 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 19 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 94% of its contemporaries.