↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
295 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
263 Mendeley
Title
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004078.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sune Høirup Petersen, Henrik Harling, Lene Tschemerinsky Kirkeby, Peer Wille‐Jørgensen, Simone Mocellin

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the Western world. Apart from surgery - which remains the mainstay of treatment for resectable primary tumours - postoperative (i.e., adjuvant) chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based regimens is now the standard treatment in Dukes' C (TNM stage III) colon tumours i.e. tumours with metastases in the regional lymph nodes but no distant metastases. In contrast, the evidence for recommendations of adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer is sparse. In Europe it is generally acknowledged that locally advanced rectal tumours receive preoperative (i.e., neoadjuvant) downstaging by radiotherapy (or chemoradiotion), whereas in the US postoperative chemoradiotion is considered the treatment of choice in all Dukes' C rectal cancers. Overall, no universal consensus exists on the adjuvant treatment of surgically resectable rectal carcinoma; moreover, no formal systematic review and meta-analysis has been so far performed on this subject.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 255 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 44 17%
Other 30 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 11%
Student > Master 28 11%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Other 51 19%
Unknown 61 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 145 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 13 5%
Unknown 74 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,593,798
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,856
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,732
of 169,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#140
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. 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 169,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.