| Title |
Effect of academic status on outcomes of surgery for rectal cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-017-5977-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristen Cagino, Maria S. Altieri, Jie Yang, Lizhou Nie, Mark Talamini, Konstantinos Spaniolas, Paula Denoya, Aurora Pryor |
| Abstract |
The purpose of our study was to investigate surgical outcomes following advanced colorectal procedures at academic versus community institutions. The SPARCS database was used to identify patients undergoing Abdominoperineal resection (APR) and Low Anterior Resection between 2009 and 2014. Linear mixed models and generalized linear mixed models were used to compare outcomes. Laparoscopic versus open procedures, surgery type, volume status, and stoma formation between academic and community facilities were compared. Higher percentages of laparoscopic surgeries (58.68 vs. 41.32%, p value < 0.0001), more APR surgeries (64.60 vs. 35.40%, p value < 0.0001), more high volume hospitals (69.46 vs. 30.54%, p value < 0.0001), and less stoma formation (48.00 vs. 52.00%, p value < 0.0001) were associated with academic centers. After adjusting for confounding factors, academic facilities were more likely to perform APR surgeries (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04-1.74, p value = 0.0235). Minorities and Medicaid patients were more likely to receive care at an academic facility. Stoma formation, open surgery, and APR were associated with longer LOS and higher rate of ED visit and 30-day readmission. Laparoscopy and APR are more commonly performed at academic than community facilities. Age, sex, race, and socioeconomic status affect the facility at which and the type of surgery patients receive, thereby influencing surgical outcomes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 50% |
| Italy | 1 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 30% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 30% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 43% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,732,589
of 24,615,420 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,235
of 6,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,473
of 450,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#59
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,615,420 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,601 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 450,050 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.