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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Surgical resection for clinical stage I high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12957-018-1337-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eisuke Mochizuki, Shun Matsuura, Kyohei Oishi, Koichi Miyashita, Koshiro Ichijyo, Syunya Furukawa, Miyuki Nagaoka, Shinichiro Mikura, Masaru Tsukui, Naoki Koshimizu, Shogo Sakurai, Kazuhiro Asada, Toshihiro Shirai |
| Abstract |
There are few reports about the factor influencing the prognosis of high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma. In this study, we evaluated surgical outcome of clinical stage I high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma. Patients who underwent curative surgery for high-grade neuroendocrine tumors of the lung in clinical stage I were included in this study. We retrospectively analyzed 27 consecutive patients. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical course of the disease after surgery and what factors influence the prognosis. Twenty-two patients have small cell carcinoma, and 5 patients have large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Patients who could undergo surgery within 60 days after the first visit (p < 0.01) and undergo lobectomy (p < 0.01) and whose pro-gastrin-releasing peptide ≦ 72 pg/ml (p = 0.04) performed good prognosis after surgery. In multivariate analysis, surgery within 60 days and operative procedure were independent factors associated with OS. Surgical resection for clinical stage I high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung should be performed as early as possible, and better outcome can be obtained with lobectomy than partial resection. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 30% |
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 50% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#622
of 2,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,134
of 330,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#23
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 2,055 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 330,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.