↓ Skip to main content

Technical guidelines for head and neck cancer IMRT on behalf of the Italian association of radiation oncology - head and neck working group

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Technical guidelines for head and neck cancer IMRT on behalf of the Italian association of radiation oncology - head and neck working group
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13014-014-0264-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Merlotti, Daniela Alterio, Riccardo Vigna-Taglianti, Alessandro Muraglia, Luciana Lastrucci, Roberto Manzo, Giuseppina Gambaro, Orietta Caspiani, Francesco Miccichè, Francesco Deodato, Stefano Pergolizzi, Pierfrancesco Franco, Renzo Corvò, Elvio G Russi, Giuseppe Sanguineti

Abstract

Performing intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) on head and neck cancer patients (HNCPs) requires robust training and experience. Thus, in 2011, the Head and Neck Cancer Working Group (HNCWG) of the Italian Association of Radiation Oncology (AIRO) organized a study group with the aim to run a literature review to outline clinical practice recommendations, to suggest technical solutions and to advise target volumes and doses selection for head and neck cancer IMRT. The main purpose was therefore to standardize the technical approach of radiation oncologists in this context. The following paper describes the results of this working group. Volumes, techniques/strategies and dosage were summarized for each head-and-neck site and subsite according to international guidelines or after reaching a consensus in case of weak literature evidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nepal 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 107 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 20 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Student > Master 17 15%
Other 16 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 26 23%
Unknown 8 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 59%
Physics and Astronomy 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 16 14%

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 29 December 2014.
All research outputs
#7,482,348
of 9,694,060 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#875
of 1,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,363
of 248,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#55
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,694,060 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,187 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 248,981 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.