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 |
Radiation Quality, Like Art, Consists in Drawing the Line Somewhere
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2013.00163 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charles A. Kunos, Ivy A. Petersen |
| Abstract |
The architects of phase I radiochemotherapy development programs impose a semblance of structured radiation "intensity" and adverse event predictability upon radiation-anticancer agent interactions whose natural complexity and improper mixing would otherwise lead to dire health consequences. It is incumbent upon radiation oncology investigators to pledge radiation quality and safety to the participants of radiochemotherapy trials. Measures of radiation quality and safety may be tools to scrutinize radiation-anticancer agent dose and schedule, as well as, radiation field design among diverse radiation delivery platforms. In this article, the merits and demerits of phase I radiochemotherapy quality and safety policies are critiqued considering the current era of rapidly evolving radiation technologies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Poland | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 50% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#4,543
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,624
of 288,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#92
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 288,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.