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 |
Improving Therapeutic Outcomes in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer not Suitable for Curative Intent Therapy — A Review of the Role of Radiation Therapy in an Era of Increasing Systemic Therapy Options
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oncology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.clon.2015.11.015 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Lehman |
| Abstract |
Lung cancer is the highest cause of mortality from cancer worldwide. Most patients present with disease not suitable for curative therapeutic options. In these patients, radiation therapy provides durable palliation of symptoms due to intrathoracic disease, whereas systemic chemotherapy improves survival compared with best supportive care. Over recent years the systemic therapeutic options available for the non-curative management of advanced lung cancer, particularly non-small cell lung cancer, have expanded to include molecularly targeted agents and immune modulating agents. The aim of this overview is to review the role and future of radiation therapy in this era of increasing systemic therapy options with particular emphasis on how radiation therapy can be used to improve therapeutic outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 75% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 27% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 50% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oncology
#1,120
of 2,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,081
of 400,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oncology
#16
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 400,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 59% of its contemporaries.