↓ Skip to main content

Endoscopic approaches to skull base malignancies affecting the anterior fossa

Overview of attention for article published in Journal Of Neurosurgical Sciences, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
6 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.
Article details
Title
Endoscopic approaches to skull base malignancies affecting the anterior fossa
Published in
Journal Of Neurosurgical Sciences, January 2021
DOI 10.23736/s0390-5616.21.05170-5
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Anterior skull base malignancies are rare and comprise distinct histological entities. Surgery encompasses the traditional craniofacial resections(CFR), and more recently, endoscopic endonasal approaches(EEA) or a hybrid cranioendoscopic (CEA) technique. Although the CFR is still considered the "gold-standard"; there is growing evidence supporting that EEA yield equivalent oncologic outcomes with less morbidity in well-selected cases. Therefore, this article aims to review the current state-of-art in addressing anterior cranial base malignancies using expanded endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEA) with particular references to surgical anatomy and nuances of hybrid cranioendoscopic techniques. Cadaveric dissections and illustrative cases are presented to detail our current surgical technique allied with tailored adjuvant therapies, and treatment strategies are further discussed based on tumor histology.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Unknown 4 67%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 1 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%
Unknown 4 67%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 April 2021.
All research outputs
#24,123,162
of 34,412,533 outputs
Outputs from Journal Of Neurosurgical Sciences
#156
of 305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#370,816
of 572,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal Of Neurosurgical Sciences
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,412,533 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 305 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 572,022 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.