↓ Skip to main content

Stepped-wedge randomised trial of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in adults with chronic constipation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
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.
Title
Stepped-wedge randomised trial of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in adults with chronic constipation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2456-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ugo Grossi, Natasha Stevens, Eleanor McAlees, Jon Lacy-Colson, Steven Brown, Anthony Dixon, Gian Luca Di Tanna, S. Mark Scott, Christine Norton, Nadine Marlin, James Mason, Charles H. Knowles

Abstract

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is an established treatment for external full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, its clinical efficacy in patients with internal prolapse is uncertain due to the lack of high-quality evidence. An individual level, stepped-wedge randomised trial has been designed to allow observer-blinded data comparisons between patients awaiting LVMR with those who have undergone surgery. Adults with symptomatic internal rectal prolapse, unresponsive to prior conservative management, will be eligible to participate. They will be randomised to three arms with different delays before surgery (0, 12 and 24 weeks). Efficacy outcome data will be collected at equally stepped time points (12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks). The primary objective is to determine clinical efficacy of LVMR compared to controls with reduction in the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) at 24 weeks serving as the primary outcome. Secondary objectives are to determine: (1) the clinical effectiveness of LVMR to 48 weeks to a maximum of 72 weeks; (2) pre-operative determinants of outcome; (3) relevant health economics for LVMR; (4) qualitative evaluation of patient and health professional experience of LVMR and (5) 30-day morbidity and mortality rates. An individual-level, stepped-wedge, randomised trial serves the purpose of providing an untreated comparison for the active treatment group, while at the same time allowing the waiting-listed participants an opportunity to obtain the intervention at a later date. In keeping with the basic ethical tenets of this design, the average waiting time for LVMR (12 weeks) will be shorter than that for routine services (24 weeks). ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN11747152 . Registered on 30 September 2015. The trial was prospectively registered (first patient enrolled on 21 March 2016).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 6%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 22 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Mathematics 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 21 31%

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 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,588,164
of 12,582,044 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#2,067
of 3,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,874
of 344,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,582,044 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 3,106 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 344,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them