↓ Skip to main content

Interdisciplinary decision making in prostate cancer therapy – 5-years’ time trends at the Interdisciplinary Prostate Cancer Center (IPC) of the Charité Berlin

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Interdisciplinary decision making in prostate cancer therapy – 5-years’ time trends at the Interdisciplinary Prostate Cancer Center (IPC) of the Charité Berlin
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-13-83
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Baumunk, Roman Reunkoff, Julien Kushner, Alexandra Baumunk, Carsten Kempkensteffen, Ursula Steiner, Steffen Weikert, Lutz Moser, Mark Schrader, Stefan Höcht, Thomas Wiegel, Kurt Miller, Martin Schostak

Abstract

Patients with prostate cancer face the difficult decision between a wide range of therapeutic options. These men require elaborate information about their individual risk profile and the therapeutic strategies´ risks and benefits to choose the best possible option. In order to detect time trends and quality improvements between an early patient population (2003/2004) and a later reference group (2007/2008) data was analysed with regards to epidemiologic parameters, differences in diagnostics and the type and ranking of the recommended therapies taking into account changes to Gleason Grading System and implementation of new therapeutic strategies, particularly Active surveillance, in 2005.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 11 23%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Computer Science 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 August 2013.
All research outputs
#18,343,746
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,565
of 1,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,925
of 197,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#36
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 197,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.