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 |
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Surgery Versus Surgery Alone for Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus (NEOCRTEC5010): A Phase III Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Clinical Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Oncology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1200/jco.2018.79.1483 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hong Yang, Hui Liu, Yuping Chen, Chengchu Zhu, Wentao Fang, Zhentao Yu, Weimin Mao, Jiaqing Xiang, Yongtao Han, Zhijian Chen, Haihua Yang, Jiaming Wang, Qingsong Pang, Xiao Zheng, Huanjun Yang, Tao Li, Florian Lordick, Xavier Benoit D’Journo, Robert J. Cerfolio, Robert J. Korst, Nuria M. Novoa, Scott J. Swanson, Alessandro Brunelli, Mahmoud Ismail, Hiran C. Fernando, Xu Zhang, Qun Li, Geng Wang, Baofu Chen, Teng Mao, Min Kong, Xufeng Guo, Ting Lin, Mengzhong Liu, Jianhua Fu, on behalf of the AME Thoracic Surgery Collaborative Group |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 90 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 | 23 | 26% |
| India | 6 | 7% |
| Spain | 6 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 4% |
| Mexico | 4 | 4% |
| France | 3 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Chile | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 58 | 64% |
| Scientists | 16 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 14 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 228 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 9% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 48 | 21% |
| Unknown | 76 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 105 | 46% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 90 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 10 August 2022.
All research outputs
#609,178
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#1,321
of 22,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,855
of 342,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#21
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,229 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 342,664 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.