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 |
Comparative efficacy of tandem autologous versus autologous followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-8722-6-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohamed A Kharfan-Dabaja, Mehdi Hamadani, Tea Reljic, Taiga Nishihori, William Bensinger, Benjamin Djulbegovic, Ambuj Kumar |
| Abstract |
Despite advances in understanding of clinical, genetic, and molecular aspects of multiple myeloma (MM) and availability of more effective therapies, MM remains incurable. The autologous-allogeneic (auto-allo) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) strategy is based on combining cytoreduction from high-dose (chemo- or chemoradio)-therapy with adoptive immunotherapy. However, conflicting results have been reported when an auto-allo HCT approach is compared to tandem autologous (auto-auto) HCT. A previously published meta-analysis has been reported; however, it suffers from serious methodological flaws. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 17% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 46% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
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 03 December 2019.
All research outputs
#14,159,409
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#673
of 1,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,411
of 280,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 280,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.