↓ Skip to main content

Simultaneous stereotactic body radiation therapy of a primary non-small cell lung cancer and synchronous carcinoma in situ in a medically inoperable patient: case report

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Simultaneous stereotactic body radiation therapy of a primary non-small cell lung cancer and synchronous carcinoma in situ in a medically inoperable patient: case report
Published in
Radiation Oncology, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-717x-8-213
Pubmed ID
Authors

Feras Oskan, Christine Kornhuber, Grit Krause, Dirk Vordermark

Abstract

The co-incidence of synchronous intraepithelial neoplasia and early stage invasive lung cancer is not a rare phenomenon. The need for curative treatment and the invasive potential of squamous cell pulmonary carcinoma in situ have been a topic of controversy. Surgical resection still remains the treatment of choice. Varieties of endoscopic techniques such as brachytherapy were developed as an alternative to surgery in selected patients. External beam radiation therapy has been used traditionally in combination with endobronchial brachytherapy in the treatment of roentgenographically occult lung cancer, and can be offered for all patients, but is handicapped, because these tumors are radiographically invisible. We report the first case of a pulmonary carcinoma in situ that was successfully treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 7%
Unknown 13 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Physics and Astronomy 1 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Unknown 5 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 September 2013.
All research outputs
#6,760,215
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#327
of 2,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,635
of 197,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#5
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,046 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 197,514 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.