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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Volumetric modulated arc planning for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy using conventional and unflattened photon beams: a dosimetric comparison with 3D technique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-717x-6-152 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Geoffrey G Zhang, Lichung Ku, Thomas J Dilling, Craig W Stevens, Ray R Zhang, Weiqi Li, Vladimir Feygelman |
| Abstract |
Frequently, three-dimensional (3D) conformal beams are used in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Recently, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) was introduced as a new treatment modality. VMAT techniques shorten delivery time, reducing the possibility of intrafraction target motion. However dose distributions can be quite different from standard 3D therapy. This study quantifies those differences, with focus on VMAT plans using unflattened photon beams. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 38% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 24 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
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 10 November 2011.
All research outputs
#15,238,442
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,036
of 2,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,012
of 142,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#16
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,041 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 142,895 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 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.