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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Managing hot flushes in men after prostate cancer—A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maturitas, December 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.10.017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica Frisk |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to describe hot flushes in men with prostate cancer, and their treatment methods. A systematic review was conducted of the literature indexed between 1966 and 2009 on the MEDLINE, the ISI Web of Knowledge, Cinahl and PsycINFO. Of 252 articles identified, 32 were selected for consideration of their complete texts, of which five were subject to detailed analysis. Diethylstilbestrol, megestrol acetate and cyproterone acetate have the strongest effect, giving a 75% or larger decrease of the number of hot flushes, but they may have severe or bothersome side-effects. Gabapentin has an uncertain effect. Clonidine is not proven effective for hot flushes. Long-term effects were not evaluated in any of the studies. SSRI/SNRI and acupuncture may have a moderate effect on hot flushes but are not proven in any RCTs. Hot flushes are common and bothersome symptoms in men with prostate cancer and those taking anti-androgen treatment, and reduce quality of life. Few treatments are available and some are avoided for these patients. Additional prospective treatment studies are needed, with long-term follow-up, in order to evaluate the effects and risks of treatments. Treatments with few or no severe side-effects should be prioritised in future investigations. Experimental studies are also needed to elucidate the mechanism behind hot flushes in men and to suggest routes for the development of new treatments. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 24% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 February 2021.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Maturitas
#1,231
of 2,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,388
of 176,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maturitas
#13
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 176,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.