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 |
Proton‐to‐photon comparative treatment planning guidelines for the Australian context
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology, February 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1111/1754-9485.13510 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Scott N. Penfold, Mikaela Dell'Oro, Peter Gorayski, Eunji Hwang, Hien Le, Melanie Penfold, Jonathan Sykes, Hanh Vu, Adam Yeo |
| Abstract |
Proton-to-photon comparative treatment planning is a current requirement of Australian Government funding for patients to receive proton beam therapy (PBT) overseas, and a future requirement for Medicare funding of PBT in Australia. Because of the fundamental differences in treatment plan creation and evaluation between PBT and conventional radiation therapy with x-rays (XRT), there is the potential for a lack of consistency in the process of comparing PBT and XRT treatment plans. This may have an impact on patient eligibility assessment for PBT. The objective of these guidelines is to provide a practical reference document for centres performing proton-to-photon comparative planning and thereby facilitate national uniformity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 7 | 47% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Singapore | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 47% |
| Scientists | 6 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 50% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 20% |
| Researcher | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 2 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 20% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 14 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,734,144
of 25,537,395 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#115
of 1,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,556
of 474,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,537,395 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,167 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 474,094 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.