↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: surgical treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Interventions for the treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancers: surgical treatment
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006205.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alyson Bessell, Anne-Marie Glenny, Susan Furness, Jan E Clarkson, Richard Oliver, David I Conway, Michaelina Macluskey, Sue Pavitt, Philip Sloan, Helen V Worthington

Abstract

Surgery is an important part of the management of oral cavity cancer with regard to both the removal of the primary tumour and removal of lymph nodes in the neck. Surgery is less frequently used in oropharyngeal cancer. Surgery alone may be treatment for early stage disease or surgery may be used in combination with radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy/biotherapy. There is variation in the recommended timing and extent of surgery in the overall treatment regimens of people with these cancers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Unknown 74 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 25%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 71%
Unspecified 5 6%
Psychology 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 7 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 08 August 2016.
All research outputs
#527,991
of 13,309,606 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,661
of 10,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,449
of 108,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#12
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,309,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. 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 108,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.