| Title |
Residual and recurrent disease rates following LEEP treatment in high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, November 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00404-009-1298-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ali Baloglu, Dilek Uysal, Incim Bezircioglu, Merve Bicer, Ayşegul Inci |
| Abstract |
Loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) is a basic procedure in the conization performed on patients with CIN II/III. After excisional therapy, close follow up is essential for the earlier detection of residual and recurrent disease. The value of PAP-smear and HPV-DNA tests for investigation of residual and recurrent disease in patients diagnosed with high-grade intraepithelial lesion after LEEP treatment was purposed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 57% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2014.
All research outputs
#19,221,261
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#1,434
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,580
of 170,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 170,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.