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 |
Sarcopenia predicts prognosis of patients with renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0636 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xu Hu, Du-Wu Liao, Zhi-Qiang Yang, Wei-Xiao Yang, San-Chao Xiong, Xiang Li |
| Abstract |
Sarcopenia, a concept reflecting the loss of skeletal muscle mass, was reported to be associated with the prognosis of several tumors. However, the prognostic value of sarcopenia in patients with renal cancer remains unclear. We carried out this meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the prognostic value of sarcopenia in patients with renal cell carcinomas. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2018. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled together. A total of 5 studies consisting of 771 patients were enrolled in this quantitative analysis, 347 (45.0%) of which had sarcopenia. Patients with sarcopenia had a worse OS compared with those without sarcopenia (HR=1.76; 95%CI, 1.35-2.31; P<0.001). In the subgroup of patients with localized and advanced/metastatic diseases, sarcopenia was also associated with poor OS (HR=1.48, P=0.039; HR=2.14, P<0.001; respectively). With a limited sample size, we did not observe difference of PFS between two groups (HR=1.56, 95% CI, 0.69-3.50, P=0.282). In the present meta-analysis, we observed that patients with sarcopenia had a worse OS compared with those without sarcopenia in RCC. Larger, preferably prospective studies, are needed to confirm and update our findings. Available at. https://www.intbrazjurol.com.br/pdf/aop/2019-0636RW.pdf. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 40% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 April 2020.
All research outputs
#16,733,516
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#339
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,406
of 432,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 726 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 432,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.