↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Comparing American Gastroenterological Association Pancreatic Cyst Management Guidelines with Fukuoka Consensus Guidelines as Predictors of Advanced Neoplasia in Patients with Suspected Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms
Published in
Journal of the American College of Surgeons, August 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.07.011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In 2015 the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) published guidelines to provide recommendations for management of suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs). The aim of this study is to compare efficacy of these to the Fukuoka consensus guidelines in predicting advanced neoplasia (AN) in patients with suspected PCNs. We performed a retrospective study of 239 patients who underwent surgical resection for suspected mucinous PCN at a tertiary care center from 2000-2014. Surgical pathology was the gold standard. The AGA and Fukuoka criteria were applied, and their performance in predicting AN, defined as invasive cancer or high-grade dysplasia (HGD), was assessed. AN was found in 71/239 (29.7%) patients (28 invasive cancer, 43 HGD). The Fukuoka "high-risk" (FG-HR) and AGA "high-risk" (AGA-HR) criteria identified patients with AN with sensitivity of 28.2% and 35.2%, specificity of 95.8% and 94.0%, positive predictive value of 74.1% and 71.4%, and negative predictive value of 75.9% and 77.5%, respectively. Overall, there was no significant difference between the guidelines for prediction of AN. There were 7 and 6 cases with invasive cancer, and 23 and 24 cases with HGD missed by the FG-HR and AGA-HR guidelines, respectively. In a retrospective analysis, the AGA guidelines are not superior to the Fukuoka guidelines in identifying AN in suspected PCNs. Both sets of guidelines have fair PPV for detection of AN, which would lead to avoidable resections in patients without AN. Additionally, the high-risk features of both guidelines do not accurately identify all patients with AN.

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 2 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 46 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 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Chemistry 1 2%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 11 October 2024.
All research outputs
#5,550,138
of 29,385,863 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American College of Surgeons
#1,560
of 4,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,011
of 317,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American College of Surgeons
#12
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,385,863 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 317,313 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.