↓ Skip to main content

Predicting the need for adaptive radiotherapy in head and neck cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Radiotherapy & Oncology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
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.
Title
Predicting the need for adaptive radiotherapy in head and neck cancer
Published in
Radiotherapy & Oncology, June 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.06.025
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Brown, Rebecca Owen, Fiona Harden, Kerrie Mengersen, Kimberley Oestreich, Whitney Houghton, Michael Poulsen, Selina Harris, Charles Lin, Sandro Porceddu

Abstract

Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) can account for the dosimetric impact of anatomical change in head and neck cancer patients; however it can be resource intensive. Consequently, it is imperative that patients likely to require ART are identified. The purpose of this study was to find predictive factors that identify oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPC) and nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients more likely to need ART. One hundred and ten patients with OPC or NPC were analysed. Patient demographics and tumour characteristics were compared between patients who were replanned and those that were not. Factors found to be significant were included in logistic regression models. Risk profiles were developed from these models. A dosimetric analysis was performed. Nodal disease stage, pre-treatment largest involved node size, diagnosis and initial weight (categorised in 2 groups) were identified as significant for inclusion in the model. Two models were found to be significant (p=0.001), correctly classifying 98.2% and 96.1% of patients respectively. Three ART risk profiles were developed. Predictive factors identifying OPC or NPC patients more likely to require ART were reported. A risk profile approach could facilitate the effective implementation of ART into radiotherapy departments through forward planning and appropriate resource allocation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 146 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 18%
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 23 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 27%
Physics and Astronomy 33 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 10%
Engineering 7 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 32 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2015.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Radiotherapy & Oncology
#3,424
of 4,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,165
of 277,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiotherapy & Oncology
#49
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 277,324 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 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.