↓ Skip to main content

Treatment for paraneoplastic neuropathies

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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.
Title
Treatment for paraneoplastic neuropathies
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007625.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Giometto, Roberta Vitaliani, Elisabeth Lindeck-Pozza, Wolfgang Grisold, Christian Vedeler

Abstract

It is not unusual to observe peripheral nervous system involvement in people with tumours outside the nervous system. Any part of the peripheral nervous system can be involved, from sensory and motor neurons to nerve roots and plexuses, from distal trunks to neuromuscular junctions. Pathogenesis also varies from direct infiltration by cancer cells, to treatment toxicity, to metabolic derangement, cachexia, infections and paraneoplastic syndromes.Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes are symptoms or signs resulting from damage to organs or tissues that are remote from the site of the malignancy or its metastases. The pathogenesis is thought to be immune-mediated as a result of a cross-reaction against antigens shared by the tumour and nervous system cells.Paraneoplastic neuropathies are the most frequently reported paraneoplastic syndromes. They are, however, heterogeneous and require several therapeutic approaches. This review was undertaken to systematically assess any data available from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the treatment of paraneoplastic syndromes of the peripheral nervous system and not the whole range of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Student > Master 11 18%
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Librarian 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 8 13%

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 11 February 2013.
All research outputs
#7,860,074
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,801
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,860
of 280,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#370
of 444 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. 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 280,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 444 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.