↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing patient positioning for intensity modulated radiation therapy in hippocampal-sparing whole brain radiation therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Practical Radiation Oncology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Optimizing patient positioning for intensity modulated radiation therapy in hippocampal-sparing whole brain radiation therapy
Published in
Practical Radiation Oncology, January 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2013.11.008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Sparing the hippocampus during whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) offers potential neurocognitive benefits. However, previously reported intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans use multiple noncoplanar beams for treatment delivery. An optimized coplanar IMRT template for hippocampal-sparing WBRT would assist in clinical workflow and minimize resource utilization. In this study, we sought to determine the optimal patient position to facilitate coplanar treatment planning and delivery of hippocampal-sparing WBRT using IMRT.

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 10 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 38 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 %
Philippines 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 24%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 32%
Physics and Astronomy 6 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 April 2020.
All research outputs
#5,720,383
of 26,587,829 outputs
Outputs from Practical Radiation Oncology
#320
of 1,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,314
of 323,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Practical Radiation Oncology
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,587,829 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,093 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 323,080 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.