| Title |
A systematic review of prognostic factors predicting survival in patients with spinal bone metastases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-017-5320-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
L. Bollen, W. C. H. Jacobs, Y. M. Van der Linden, O. Van der Hel, W. Taal, P. D. S. Dijkstra |
| Abstract |
For the selection of treatment in patients with spinal bone metastases (SBM), survival estimation plays a crucial role to avoid over- and under-treatment. To aid clinicians in this difficult task, several prediction models have been developed, consisting of many different risk factors. The aim of this systematic review was to identify prognostic factors that are associated with survival in patients with SBM to support development of predictive models. A systematic review was performed with focus on prognostic factors associated with survival in patients with SBM. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion and assessed the risk of bias. A level of evidence synthesis was performed for each prognostic factor. Inter-observer agreement for the risk of bias assessment was determined by the kappa-statistic. After screening, 142 full-text articles were obtained, of which 22 met the eligibility criteria. A total of 43 different prognostic factors were investigated in the included studies, of which 17 were relevant to pre-treatment survival estimation. The prognostic factors most frequently associated with survival were the primary tumor and the performance status. The prognostic factors most frequently not associated with survival were age, gender, number and location of the SBM and the presence of a pathologic fracture. Prognostication for patients with SBM should be based on an accurate primary tumor classification, combined with a performance score. The benefit of adding other prognostic factors is doubtful. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 49% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 20 | 36% |
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,591,506
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#2,504
of 4,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,985
of 327,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#41
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 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 4,670 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 327,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.