↓ Skip to main content

Clinicopathological analysis of colorectal cancer: a comparison between emergency and elective surgical cases

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 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 (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Clinicopathological analysis of colorectal cancer: a comparison between emergency and elective surgical cases
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-11-133
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sam Ghazi, Elisabeth Berg, Annika Lindblom, Ulrik Lindforss, Low-Risk Colorectal Cancer Study Group

Abstract

Approximately 15 to 30% of colorectal cancers present as an emergency, most often as obstruction or perforation. Studies report poorer outcome for patients who undergo emergency compared with elective surgery, both for their initial hospital stay and their long-term survival. Advanced tumor pathology and tumors with unfavorable histologic features may provide the basis for the difference in outcome. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and pathologic profiles of emergency and elective surgical cases for colorectal cancer, and relate these to gender, age group, tumor location, and family history of the disease. The main outcome measure was the difference in morphology between elective and emergency surgical cases.

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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 20 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 54%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 22 31%
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 18 June 2013.
All research outputs
#12,684,823
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#313
of 2,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,901
of 197,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#5
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,040 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 197,310 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.