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 |
Systemic treatment in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: what is standard, what is new
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-017-0872-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Maria Frezza, Silvia Stacchiotti, Alessandro Gronchi |
| Abstract |
For metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients not eligible for surgery, systemic treatments, including standard chemotherapy and newer biological compounds, still play the most relevant role in the management of the disease. An anthracycline and alkylating agent combination has formed the cornerstone of chemotherapy in STS for more than 30 years, with its value over that of administration of anthracycline as a single agent still being debated. Efforts have been made to improve the activity and minimise the toxicity of the combination, as well as to explore the upfront efficacy of agents known to be active in sarcoma and to develop new biological compounds. Nevertheless, beyond the first line, evidence for medical treatment in STS is less robust and all the more driven by histology. Thus, the introduction of kinases and small molecule inhibitors in the treatment armamentarium for STS is a major achievement in this setting. Preliminary data on immunotherapy are also available and discussed in this review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 | 4 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 15% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Mexico | 1 | 8% |
| Comoros | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 54% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,464,878
of 24,410,879 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,208
of 3,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,572
of 321,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#25
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,410,879 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.0. 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 321,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 52% of its contemporaries.