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 |
2018 consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the diagnosis and treatment of cancer of unknown primary
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Oncology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12094-018-1899-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Losa, L. Iglesias, M. Pané, J. Sanz, B. Nieto, V. Fusté, L. de la Cruz-Merino, Á. Concha, C. Balañá, X. Matías-Guiu |
| Abstract |
Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is defined as a heterogeneous group of tumours that present with metastasis, and in which attempts to identify the original site have failed. They differ from other primary tumours in their biological features and how they spread, which means that they can be considered a separate entity. There are several hypotheses regarding their origin, but the most plausible explanation for their aggressiveness and chemoresistance seems to involve chromosomal instability. Depending on the type of study done, CUP can account for 2-9% of all cancer patients, mostly 60-75 years old. This article reviews the main clinical, pathological, and molecular studies conducted to analyse and determine the origin of CUP. The main strategies for patient management and treatment, by both clinicians and pathologists, are also addressed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 5 | 71% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 26 | 45% |
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 20 February 2019.
All research outputs
#6,806,356
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#288
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,440
of 330,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#4
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 330,889 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.