| Title |
ESMO–ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease † † These consensus statements were developed by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and are published jointly in the Annals of Oncology and the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. The two societies nominated participants who attended the consensus conference and co-authored the final manuscript.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Oncology, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1093/annonc/mdz062 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
N. Colombo, C. Sessa, A. du Bois, J. Ledermann, W.G. McCluggage, I. McNeish, P. Morice, S. Pignata, I. Ray-Coquard, I. Vergote, T. Baert, I. Belaroussi, A. Dashora, S. Olbrecht, F. Planchamp, D. Querleu, ESMO-ESGO Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference Working Group, T. Baert, S. Banerjee, I. Belaroussi, P. Blecharz, I. Bruchim, D. Cibula, N. Colombo, N. Concin, B. Davidson, A. Dashora, M. Devouassoux-Shisheboran, A. du Bois, A. Ferrero, R. Glasspool, A. González-Martin, V. Heinzelmann-Schwarz, F. Joly, J.W. Kim, F. Kridelka, J. Ledermann, D. Lorusso, S. Mahner, W.G. McCluggage, I. McNeish, M. Mikami, M.R. Mirza, P. Morice, S. Nicum, S. Olbrecht, D.M. O’Donnell, P. Pautier, F. Planchamp, S. Pignata, D. Querleu, I. Ray-Coquard, A. Rodolakis, J. Sehouli, F. Selcukbiricik, C. Sessa, N. Singh, D.S.P. Tan, D. Timmerman, G. Tognon, J. van der Velden, I. Vergote, P.O. Witteveen, A.G. Zeimet |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 11% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Kenya | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| China | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 78% |
| Scientists | 3 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 516 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 516 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 63 | 12% |
| Other | 46 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 42 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 34 | 7% |
| Other | 82 | 16% |
| Unknown | 208 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 182 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 2% |
| Other | 49 | 9% |
| Unknown | 220 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#902,763
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Oncology
#393
of 7,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,055
of 366,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Oncology
#18
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 366,316 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.