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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Accuracy of prostate biopsies for predicting Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens: nationwide trends 2000–2012
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Urology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/bju.13458 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniela Danneman, Linda Drevin, Brett Delahunt, Hemamali Samaratunga, David Robinson, Ola Bratt, Stacy Loeb, Pär Stattin, Lars Egevad |
| Abstract |
To investigate how well the Gleason score in diagnostic needle biopsies predicted the Gleason score in a subsequent radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen before and after the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) revision of Gleason grading, and if the recently proposed ISUP grades 1-5 (corresponding to Gleason score 6, 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10) better predict the RP grade. All prostate cancers diagnosed in Sweden are reported to the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR). We analysed Gleason score and ISUP grades from the diagnostic biopsies and RP specimens from 15,598 men in the NPCR who were diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 with clinical stage T1-2 M0/X prostate cancer on needle biopsy at age ≤ 70 years, had serum PSA of <20 ng/ml and underwent a RP within 6 months after diagnosis as their primary treatment. Prediction of RP Gleason score increased from 55% to 68% between 2000 and 2012. Most of the increase occurred before 2005 (9 percentage points) (p<0.001). However, when adjusting for Gleason score and year of diagnosis in a multivariable analysis the prediction of RP Gleason score decreased over time (OR 0.98, p<0.002). A change to ISUP grades would have led to a decreasing agreement between biopsy and RP grades over time, from 68% in 2000 to 57% in 2012, with an OR of 0.95 in multivariable analysis (p<0.001). Agreement between biopsy and RP Gleason score improved from 2000 to 2012 with most of the improvement occurring before the 2005 ISUP grading revision. Had ISUP grades been used instead of Gleason score, the agreement between biopsy and RP grade would have decreased, likely because of its separation of Gleason score 7 into ISUP grades 2 and 3 (Gleason score 3+4 versus 4+3). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 22% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 35% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,374,015
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Urology
#2,354
of 6,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,730
of 314,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Urology
#24
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 314,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 62% of its contemporaries.