↓ Skip to main content

Determinants of survival and attempted resection in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer: An Australian population-based study

Overview of attention for article published in Pancreatology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Determinants of survival and attempted resection in patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer: An Australian population-based study
Published in
Pancreatology, June 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.pan.2016.06.010
Pubmed ID
Authors

E.A. Burmeister, M. Waterhouse, S.J. Jordan, D.L. O'Connell, N.D. Merrett, D. Goldstein, D. Wyld, V. Beesley, H. Gooden, M. Janda, R.E. Neale

Abstract

There are indications that pancreatic cancer survival may differ according to sociodemographic factors, such as residential location. This may be due to differential access to curative resection. Understanding factors associated with the decision to offer a resection might enable strategies to increase the proportion of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery. Data were extracted from medical records and cancer registries for patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer between July 2009 and June 2011, living in one of two Australian states. Among patients clinically staged with non-metastatic disease we examined factors associated with survival using Cox proportional hazards models. To investigate survival differences we examined determinants of: 1) attempted surgical resection overall; 2) whether patients with locally advanced disease were classified as having resectable disease; and 3) attempted resection among those considered resectable. Data were collected for 786 eligible patients. Disease was considered locally advanced for 561 (71%) patients, 510 (65%) were classified as having potentially resectable disease and 365 (72%) of these had an attempted resection. Along with age, comorbidities and tumour stage, increasing remoteness of residence was associated with poorer survival. Remoteness of residence and review by a hepatobiliary surgeon were factors influencing the decision to offer surgery. This study indicated disparity in survival dependent on patients' residential location and access to a specialist hepatobiliary surgeon. Accurate clinical staging is a critical element in assessing surgical resectability and it is therefore crucial that all patients have access to specialised clinical services.

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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 59%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 8 30%
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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Pancreatology
#895
of 1,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,107
of 368,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pancreatology
#18
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 368,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.