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 |
Imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma and image guided therapies - how we do it
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Imaging, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40644-017-0110-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathon Willatt, Julie A. Ruma, Shadi F. Azar, Nara L. Dasika, F. Syed |
| Abstract |
Treatment options for hepatocellular carcinoma have evolved over recent years. Interventional radiologists and surgeons can offer curative treatments for early stage tumours, and locoregional therapies can be provided resulting in longer survival times. Early diagnosis with screening ultrasound is the key. CT and MRI are used to characterize lesions and determine the extent of tumour burden. Imaging techniques are discussed in this article as the correct imaging protocols are essential to optimise successful detection and characterisation. After treatment it is important to establish regular imaging follow up with CT or MRI as local residual disease can be easily treated, and recurrence elsewhere in the liver is common. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 92 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 30 | 33% |
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 05 September 2018.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Imaging
#320
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,396
of 323,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Imaging
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 323,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.