↓ Skip to main content

Mitigating Fear and Loathing in Managing Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Overview of attention for article published in Seminars in Hematology (ScienceDirect), March 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 (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Mitigating Fear and Loathing in Managing Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Published in
Seminars in Hematology (ScienceDirect), March 2015
DOI 10.1053/j.seminhematol.2015.03.009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The contemporary care of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is made complex by potentially toxic treatments, continuously advancing science, aging patients, and individual treatment goals. By taking a survey of present-day approaches, we aim to dispel some of the trepidation surrounding that care of patients with AML. At the beginning is the initial presentation, and we will discuss whether or not AML should be considered a medical emergency. We will explore the complex realm of patient decision-making about initial therapy, including the intricate straits of patient-doctor communication, and available options for initial treatment. We will then address post-remission approaches and the controversies that lie therein, and survivorship issues. Finally, we will investigate the current role molecular assessments are playing in therapy recommendations.

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 34 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 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Psychology 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 32%
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 27 August 2015.
All research outputs
#24,122,808
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Seminars in Hematology (ScienceDirect)
#900
of 1,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,690
of 323,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seminars in Hematology (ScienceDirect)
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,017 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 323,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.