The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Patient and Physician Preferences for Nonoperative Management for Low Rectal Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, November 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1097/dcr.0000000000001166 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erin D Kennedy, Anna M Borowiec, Selina Schmocker, Charles Cho, James Brierley, Shirley Li, J Charles Victor, Nancy N Baxter |
| Abstract |
Although the body of evidence supporting nonoperative management for rectal cancer has been accumulating, there has been little systematic investigation to explore how physicians and patients value the tradeoffs between oncologic and functional outcomes after abdominal perineal resection and nonoperative management. The purpose of this study was to elicit patient and physician preferences for nonoperative management relative to abdominal perineal resection in the setting of low rectal cancer. We conducted a standardized interviews of patients and a cross-sectional survey of physicians. Patients from 1 tertiary care center and physicians from across Canada were included. The study involved 50 patients who were previously treated for rectal cancer and 363 physicians who treat rectal cancer. Interventions included standardized interviews using the threshold technique with patients and surveys mailed to physicians. We measured absolute increase risk in local regrowth and absolute decrease in overall survival that patients and physicians would accept with nonoperative management relative to abdominal perineal resection. Patients were willing to accept a 20% absolute increase for local regrowth (ie, from 0% to 20%) and a 20% absolute decrease in overall survival (ie, from 80% to 60%) with nonoperative management relative to abdominal perineal resection, whereas physicians were willing to accept a 5% absolute increase for local regrowth (ie, from 0% to 5%) and a 5% absolute decrease in overall survival (ie, from 80% to 75%) with nonoperative management relative to abdominal perineal resection. Data were subject to response bias and generalizable to only a select group of patients with low rectal cancer. Offering nonoperative management as an option to patients, even if oncologic outcomes are not equivalent, may be more consistent with the values of patients in this setting. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A688. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 21% |
| Canada | 7 | 11% |
| Spain | 5 | 8% |
| Italy | 4 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 27 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 25 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 19 | 31% |
| Scientists | 14 | 23% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 6% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 13 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,255,749
of 26,122,087 outputs
Outputs from Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
#140
of 4,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,567
of 366,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
#5
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,122,087 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,860 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 366,496 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.