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 |
Cost-utility analysis of maintenance therapy with gemcitabine or erlotinib vsobservation with predefined second-line treatment after cisplatin–gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: IFCT-GFPC 0502-Eco phase III study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2407-14-953 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabelle Borget, Maurice Pérol, David Pérol, Armelle Lavolé, Laurent Greillier, Pascal Dô, Virginie Westeel, Jacky Crequit, Hervé Léna, Isabelle Monnet, Hervé Le Caer, Pierre Fournel, Lionel Falchero, Michel Poudenx, Fabien Vaylet, Sylvie Chabaud, Alain Vergnenegre, Gérard Zalcman, Christos Chouaïd |
| Abstract |
The IFCT-GFPC 0502 phase III study reported prolongation of progression-free survival with gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance vs. observation after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis was undertaken to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these strategies for the global population and pre-specified subgroups. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 15 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 15% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 May 2022.
All research outputs
#6,276,331
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,563
of 8,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,525
of 354,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#36
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,283 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 354,430 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.