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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Validity of St Gallen risk categories in prognostication of breast cancer patients in Southern Sri Lanka
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Women's Health, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12905-018-0524-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harshini Peiris, Lakmini Mudduwa, Neil Thalagala, Kamani Jayatilake |
| Abstract |
Although, there are many developments in the field of management, breast cancer is still the commonest cause of cancer related deaths in women in Sri Lanka. This emphasizes the need for validation of treatment protocols that are used in Sri Lanka for managing breast cancers. There are no published papers on treatment and survival of breast cancer patients in Sri Lanka. Hence this study was designed to determine the validity of St Gallen risk categories based on the survival outcomes of breast cancer patients in Southern Sri Lanka. This retro-prospective study included all female breast cancer patients who had sought the immunohistochemistry services of our unit from May 2006 to December 2012. Patients who had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. Patients were stratified according to the St Gallen risk categories; low-risk (LR), intermediate-risk (IR) and high-risk (HR), which is used in deciding on the adjuvant treatment. IR category was subdivided based on presence/absence of 1-3 positive-nodes (absent-IR1, present-IR2) and HR on the number of positive-nodes(1-3 lymph nodes;HR1,> 3 lymph nodes;HR2). Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression models were used in the survival analysis. This study included 713breast cancer patients (LR-2%, IR1-45%, IR2-10%, HR1-13%, HR2-30%). Five year breast cancer specific survival (BCSS)wasLR-100%, IR-91%, HR-66% and the recurrence free survival (RFS) was LR-85%, IR-84%, HR-65%. BCSS and RFS curves were significantly different between the three risk categories (p < 0.001). No survival difference was evident between the IR1 and IR2 (BCSS-p = 0.232, RFS-p = 0.118). HR1 and HR2 had a distinctly different BCSS (p = 0.033) with no difference in RFS (p = 0.190). This study validates the St Gallen risk categorization of female breast cancer patients in our setting. However, the HR includes two subsets of patients with a distinct difference in BCSS. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Librarian | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 21% |
| Unknown | 8 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 February 2018.
All research outputs
#5,808,344
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#578
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,195
of 440,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#22
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 440,194 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.