↓ Skip to main content

Combined Radio- and Chemotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Systematic Review of Landmark Studies Based on Acquired Citations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Combined Radio- and Chemotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Systematic Review of Landmark Studies Based on Acquired Citations
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2013.00176
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carsten Nieder, Adam Pawinski, Nicolaus H. Andratschke

Abstract

The important role of combined chemoradiation for several groups of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is reflected by the large number of scientific articles published during the last 30 years. Different measures of impact and clinical relevance of published research are available, each with its own pros and cons. For this review, article citation rate was chosen. Highly cited articles were identified through systematic search of the citation database Scopus. Among the 100 most often cited articles, meta-analyses (n = 5) achieved a median of 203 citations, guidelines (n = 7) 97, phase III trials (n = 29) 168, phase II trials (n = 21) 135, phase I trials (n = 7) 88, and others combined 115.5 (p = 0.001). Numerous national and international cooperative groups and several single institutions were actively involved in performing often cited, high-impact trials, reflecting the fact that NSCLC is a world-wide challenge that requires research collaboration. Platinum-containing combinations have evolved into a standard of care, typically administered concurrently. The issue of radiotherapy fractionation and total dose has also been studied extensively, yet with less conclusive results. Differences in target volume definition have been addressed. However, it was not possible to test all theoretically possible combinations of radiotherapy regimens, drugs, and drug doses (lower radiosensitizing doses compared to higher systemically active doses). That is why current guidelines offer physicians a choice of different, presumably equivalent treatment alternatives. This review identifies open questions and strategies for further research.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Poland 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 2 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Unspecified 2 6%
Chemistry 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 July 2013.
All research outputs
#15,090,466
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#4,412
of 22,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,977
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#87
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 288,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 72% of its contemporaries.