↓ Skip to main content

Multidisciplinary team conferences promote treatment according to guidelines in rectal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Oncologica, March 2015
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 (#40 of 1,927)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Multidisciplinary team conferences promote treatment according to guidelines in rectal cancer
Published in
Acta Oncologica, March 2015
DOI 10.3109/0284186x.2014.952387
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fredrik Brännström, Jon K Bjerregaard, Anders Winbladh, Mef Nilbert, Arthur Revhaug, Gunnar Wagenius, Malin Mörner

Abstract

Background. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) conferences have been introduced into standard cancer care, though evidence that it benefits the patient is weak. We used the national Swedish Rectal Cancer Register to evaluate predictors for case discussion at a MDT conference and its impact on treatment. Material and methods. Of the 6760 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in Sweden between 2007 and 2010, 78% were evaluated at a MDT. Factors that influenced whether a patient was discussed at a preoperative MDT conference were evaluated in 4883 patients, and the impact of MDT evaluation on the implementation of preoperative radiotherapy was evaluated in 1043 patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours, and in 1991 patients with pN+ M0 tumours. Results. Hospital volume, i.e. the number of rectal cancer surgical procedures performed per year, was the major predictor for MDT evaluation. Patients treated at hospitals with < 29 procedures per year had an odds ratio (OR) for MDT evaluation of 0.15. Age and tumour stage also influenced the chance of MDT evaluation. MDT evaluation significantly predicted the likelihood of being treated with preoperative radiotherapy in patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.08-8.34), and pN+ M0 (OR 3.55, 95% CI 2.60-4.85), even when corrected for co-morbidity and age. Conclusion. Patients with rectal cancer treated at high-volume hospitals are more likely to be discussed at a MDT conference, and that is an independent predictor of the use of adjuvant radiotherapy. These results indirectly support the introduction into clinical practice of discussing all rectal cancer patients at MDT conferences, not least those being treated at low-volume hospitals.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Psychology 3 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 09 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,920,937
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from Acta Oncologica
#40
of 1,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,125
of 269,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Oncologica
#2
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,927 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. 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 269,775 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 97% of its contemporaries.