| Title |
Nachsorge bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Die Innere Medizin, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00108-018-0414-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Ebert |
| Abstract |
The follow-up care of patients with gastrointestinal cancer is poorly defined. Prospective trials showing that regular follow-up care is advantageous are largely lacking. Follow-up is primarily based on symptom evaluation, as well as on an assessment of nutritional status and the need for psycho-oncological care. Whereas the evidence for regular endoscopic follow-up is well defined in early cancers, the role of follow-up care in advanced cancers is less well defined. This deficit is mainly due to the lack of therapeutic consequences in the case of recurrence. In such cases, cure is only rarely possible, and most studies have failed to demonstrate a survival benefit following standardized follow-up care of these patients. However, in view of the evolving treatment options in recurrent disease and the success of recurrent colorectal cancer treatment, it seems reasonable to define the current status of follow-up care for patients with gastrointestinal cancers. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Die Innere Medizin
#241
of 495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,484
of 343,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Innere Medizin
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 495 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. 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 343,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.