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 |
Robotic Rectal Cancer Resection: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-014-4278-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Minia Hellan, James Ouellette, Jorge A. Lagares-Garcia, Stephen M. Rauh, Harold L. Kennedy, John D. Nicholson, David Nesbitt, Craig S. Johnson, Alessio Pigazzi |
| Abstract |
Conventional laparoscopy has been applied to colorectal resections for more than 2 decades. However, laparoscopic rectal resection is technically demanding, especially when performing a tumor-specific mesorectal excision in a difficult pelvis. Robotic surgery is uniquely designed to overcome most of these technical limitations. The aim of this study was to confirm the feasibility of robotic rectal cancer surgery in a large multicenter study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 60% |
| South Africa | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 53% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 9% |
| Engineering | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
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 19 July 2015.
All research outputs
#4,655,546
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#1,516
of 6,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,243
of 361,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#12
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 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 6,451 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 361,040 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.