↓ Skip to main content

How does robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compare with open surgery in men with high‐risk prostate cancer?

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Urology, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
How does robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compare with open surgery in men with high‐risk prostate cancer?
Published in
British Journal of Urology, March 2013
DOI 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2012.11493.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

What's known on the subject? and what does the study add?: Previous studies have shown that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) can be performed in men with high-risk prostate cancer with similar outcomes to that of open surgery. However, most of the literature consists of small case series and compares RARP outcomes to open outcomes from the literature. This study compared a cohort of high-risk patients undergoing open RP and RARP at a single institution with good follow up. We found no difference in positive margin rates or likelihood of prostate cancer recurrence. This adds to the growing evidence that RARP is a safe option for men with high-risk disease.

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.
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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Other 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 14 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 October 2024.
All research outputs
#10,531,597
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Urology
#3,867
of 7,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,202
of 241,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Urology
#63
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. 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 241,901 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.