↓ Skip to main content

Corticosteroids for the resolution of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Corticosteroids for the resolution of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2000
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001219
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J Feuer, Karen E Broadley

Abstract

Gastrointestinal and ovarian cancers are common cancers. The incidence of associated malignant bowel obstruction in patients with advanced cancers of these types is not known, and the best management of these patients is controversial. Inappropriate management may result in uncontrolled (faeculant) vomiting, pain and distress. Management of the symptoms can include palliative surgery, nasogastric tube suction together with intravenous fluids, or pharmacological means, such as corticosteroids. There is uncertainty regarding both the efficacy and possible harmful effects of corticosteroids, and also the most effective type, dose/dosing regime, route and period of administration.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
Denmark 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Hong Kong 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 84 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 16%
Other 14 15%
Student > Postgraduate 12 13%
Student > Master 12 13%
Unspecified 10 11%
Other 28 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 59%
Unspecified 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Psychology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 11 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 March 2015.
All research outputs
#3,090,544
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,163
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,678
of 227,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#155
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 227,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.