↓ Skip to main content

Colorectal multidisciplinary meeting audit to determine patient benefit

Overview of attention for article published in Australian & New Zealand Journal of Surgery, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Colorectal multidisciplinary meeting audit to determine patient benefit
Published in
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Surgery, November 2015
DOI 10.1111/ans.13366
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

New Zealand tumour standards require discussion of all cases of colorectal cancer in a multidisciplinary meeting (MDM), but supporting evidence is lacking. The aim was to determine which patients benefit from MDM discussion. A retrospective and prospective audit was undertaken of all patients discussed in the Christchurch Hospital colorectal MDM over 12 months to November 2014, who were compared with contemporaneous patients not discussed and identified through Hospital discharge codes. In total, 641 patients were identified, with 459 (70%) discussed in the MDM, on average 7 years younger than not discussed. The proportion discussed by location was 39.2% colon, 63% rectosigmoid, 98% rectal, 96.6% anal. Discussed patients were more likely to have magnetic resonance imaging (68% cf 9.3%), fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan (18% versus 2%) and chest computerized tomography scan (50% versus 26%). For colon cancer, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage I and II, 91% of 68 non-discussed patients went straight to surgery compared with 48% of 27 discussed in the MDM; for AJCC stage III uptake of adjuvant chemotherapy was the same whether discussed or not. An R0 resection was achieved for 91% of discussed patients, and 96% of not discussed. A clear referrer's plan, prospectively recorded in 94 patients, was changed after the MDM in 23%. Clinical staging was changed in 20 patients (4%), none with colon cancers. Discussion in the MDM influenced management, but was unlikely to change management for AJCC stage I/II colon cancer, who could be spared mandatory review in the MDM and be discussed selectively as treating clinicians decide.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 27 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 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Unspecified 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Materials Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#31,265,400
of 34,447,360 outputs
Outputs from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Surgery
#2,692
of 3,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,956
of 322,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Surgery
#28
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,447,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,287 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 322,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.