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 |
The prognostic value of preoperative prognostic nutritional index in patients with hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-018-1391-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lu-Lu Ye, Ronald Wihal Oei, Fang-Fang Kong, Cheng-Run Du, Rui-Ping Zhai, Qing-Hai Ji, Chao-Su Hu, Hong-Mei Ying |
| Abstract |
To analyze the prognostic value of preoperative prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in predicting the survival outcome of hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPSCC) patients receiving radical surgery. From March 2006 to August 2016, 123 eligible HPSCC patients were reviewed. The preoperative PNI was calculated as serum albumin (g/dL) × 10 + total lymphocyte count (mm-3) × 0.005. These biomarkers were measured within 2 weeks prior to surgery. The impact of preoperative PNI on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Median value of 52.0 for the PNI was selected as the cutoff point. PNI value was then classified into two groups: high PNI (> 52.0) versus low PNI (≤ 52.0). Multivariate analysis showed that high preoperative PNI was an independent prognostic factor for better OS (P = 0.000), PFS (P = 0.001), LRFS (P = 0.005) and DMFS (P = 0.016). High PNI predicts superior survival in HPSCC patients treated with radical surgery. As easily accessible biomarkers, preoperative PNI together with the conventional TNM staging system can be utilized to enhance the accuracy in predicting survival and determining therapy strategies in these patients. |
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 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 46% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
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 24 January 2018.
All research outputs
#15,489,831
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,258
of 4,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,062
of 441,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#53
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 441,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.