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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
NCCN Guidelines Insights: Hodgkin Lymphoma, Version 1.2018.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (JNCCN), March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.6004/jnccn.2018.0013 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard T Hoppe, Ranjana H Advani, Weiyun Z Ai, Richard F Ambinder, Patricia Aoun, Philippe Armand, Celeste M Bello, Cecil M Benitez, Philip J Bierman, Robert Chen, Bouthaina Dabaja, Robert Dean, Andres Forero, Leo I Gordon, Francisco J Hernandez-Ilizaliturri, Ephraim P Hochberg, Jiayi Huang, Patrick B Johnston, Mark S Kaminski, Vaishalee P Kenkre, Nadia Khan, Kami Maddocks, David G Maloney, Monika Metzger, Joseph O Moore, David Morgan, Craig H Moskowitz, Carolyn Mulroney, Rachel Rabinovitch, Stuart Seropian, Randa Tao, Jane N Winter, Joachim Yahalom, Jennifer L Burns, Ndiya Ogba |
| Abstract |
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) provide recommendations for the management of adult patients with HL. The NCCN Guidelines Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within the NCCN Member Institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update the recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize recent updates centered on treatment considerations for relapsed/refractory classic HL. |
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 | 3 | 30% |
| Spain | 3 | 30% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 90% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 27 November 2019.
All research outputs
#4,198,623
of 25,655,374 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (JNCCN)
#501
of 1,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,085
of 349,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (JNCCN)
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,655,374 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 349,638 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 69% of its contemporaries.