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 |
Laparoscopy for diagnosing resectability of disease in patients with advanced ovarian cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009786.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marianne J Rutten, Mariska MG Leeflang, Gemma G Kenter, Ben Willem J Mol, Marrije Buist |
| Abstract |
The presence of residual tumour after primary debulking surgery is the most important prognostic factor in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. In up to 60% of cases, residual tumour of more than 1 cm is left behind, stressing the necessity of accurately selecting those patients who should be treated with primary debulking surgery and those who should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy instead. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 9 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 54% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,978,603
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,332
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,980
of 239,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#179
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 239,756 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.