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 |
Prognostic significance of preoperative plasma D-dimer level in patients with surgically resected clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13019-017-0676-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaoru Kaseda, Keisuke Asakura, Akio Kazama, Yukihiko Ozawa |
| Abstract |
Plasma D-dimer level, a marker of hypercoagulation, has been reported to be associated with survival in several types of cancers. The present study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of preoperative D-dimer levels in patients with surgically resected clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Participants comprised 237 patients with surgically resected clinical stage I NSCLC. In addition to factors such as age, sex, and smoking status, the association between preoperative D-dimer level and survival was explored. Patients were divided into two groups according to D-dimer level: Group A, ≤ 1.0 μg/ml (n = 170); and Group B, > 1.0 μg/ml (n = 67). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 81.6% for Group A and 66.6% for Group B (p < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival rate was 93.6% for Group A and 84.7% for Group B (p = 0.002). Multivariate survival analysis identified D-dimer level as an independent prognostic factor, along with age, maximum standardized uptake value of the primary tumor, and pathological stage. Preoperative D-dimer level is an independent prognostic factor in patients with surgically resected clinical stage I NSCLC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 46% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 46% |
| Psychology | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
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 15 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,964,325
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#344
of 1,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,665
of 438,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,244 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 438,546 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.