↓ Skip to main content

Pre-treatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Pre-treatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008217.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elly Brockbank, Fani Kokka, Andrew Bryant, Christophe Pomel, Karina Reynolds

Abstract

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2011.Cervical cancer is the most common cause of death from gynaecological cancers worldwide. Locally advanced cervical cancer, FIGO stage (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) equal or more than IB1 is treated with chemotherapy and external beam radiotherapy followed by brachytherapy. If there is metastatic para-aortic nodal disease, radiotherapy is extended to cover this area. Due to increased morbidity, ideally extended-field radiotherapy is given only when para-aortic nodal disease is confirmed. Therefore, accurate assessment of the extent of the disease is very important for planning the most appropriate treatment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 115 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 15%
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 24 20%
Unknown 20 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 27 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 April 2013.
All research outputs
#6,353,170
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,765
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,194
of 144,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#78
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 144,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.