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 |
Low transverse incision for lateral neck dissection in patients with papillary thyroid cancer: improved cosmesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12957-017-1160-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chang Myeon Song, Yong Bae Ji, In Sik Kim, Ji Young Lee, Dong Sun Kim, Kyung Tae |
| Abstract |
Various incisions and approaches have been developed for lateral neck dissection. The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical and cosmetic outcomes of a single low transverse incision with the hockey stick incision for lateral neck dissection (LND) in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). We retrospectively analyzed 97 patients with PTC who underwent therapeutic LND and total thyroidectomy by low transverse incision (62 patients) or hockey stick incision (35 patients). We compared the operative results, cosmetic outcomes, objective scar measurement, and sensory disturbance between the two groups. The number of harvested and metastatic lymph nodes, Vancouver Scar Scale scores, and sensory change were not significantly different between the two groups. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes in level II was 9.82 vs. 9.63 (P = 0.885) (transverse incision vs. hockey stick incision, respectively) and in level V was 6.36 vs. 5.63 (P = 0.597). However, subjective satisfaction with the scar and neck contour was higher in the low transverse incision group compared with the hockey stick incision group. Scores for scar consciousness and sensory change were not significantly different between the two groups. A single low transverse incision may provide equivalent surgical outcomes and superior cosmetic outcomes compared with the hockey stick incision for LND in PTC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 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 22 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,281,580
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#442
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,331
of 310,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 310,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 64% of its contemporaries.