↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Transanal Surgery in the Management of T1 Rectal Cancers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
The Role of Transanal Surgery in the Management of T1 Rectal Cancers
Published in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11605-015-2866-4
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The management of T1 rectal cancers is based on finding the balance between optimal oncologic outcomes and acceptable functional results for the patient. While radical resection involving a proctectomy is considered the most oncologically adequate option, its adverse effects on patient reported outcomes makes this a less than ideal choice in certain circumstances. While local excision can circumvent some of the adverse functional outcomes, its inadequacy in assessing metastatic lymph node disease and the subsequent negative impact of untreated positive lymph nodes on patient prognosis is a cause for concern. As a result, the therapeutic strategy has to be based on patient and disease-related factors in order to identify the best treatment choice that maximizes survival benefit and preserves health-related quality of life. After adequate preoperative staging work up, in selected patients with favorable pathological features, local excision can be considered. These cancers can be removed by transanal local excision or transanal endoscopic microsurgery, depending on the location of the cancer and expertise available. While perioperative morbidity is minimal, close postoperative follow-up is essential.

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 25 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 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 40%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 11 44%
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 03 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,449,158
of 28,009,810 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#1,966
of 3,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,133
of 283,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#28
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,009,810 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,115 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 283,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 54% of its contemporaries.