↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional interventions for reducing gastrointestinal toxicity in adults undergoing radical pelvic radiotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
316 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
Nutritional interventions for reducing gastrointestinal toxicity in adults undergoing radical pelvic radiotherapy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009896.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline C Henson, Sorrel Burden, Susan E Davidson, Simon Lal

Abstract

Across the developed world, an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 people are treated annually with pelvic radiotherapy and 80% will develop gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms during treatment. Acute GI symptoms are associated with a greater risk of chronic, often debilitating, GI symptoms. Up to one-third of patients are malnourished before pelvic radiotherapy and up to four-fifths of patients lose weight during treatment. Malnutrition is linked to a higher risk of GI toxicity, which can lead to breaks in radiotherapy and early cessation of chemotherapy, thus compromising the efficacy of the primary cancer treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users 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 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 312 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 13%
Student > Bachelor 36 11%
Researcher 33 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 6%
Other 56 18%
Unknown 106 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 4%
Social Sciences 11 3%
Psychology 10 3%
Other 34 11%
Unknown 117 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,891,059
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,288
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,956
of 320,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#146
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 320,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.