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 |
Minimal access versus open spinal surgery in treating painful spine metastasis: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12957-015-0468-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zuozhang Yang, Yihao Yang, Ya Zhang, Zhaoxin Zhang, Yanjin Chen, Yan Shen, Lei Han, Da Xu, Hongpu Sun |
| Abstract |
The study design of this paper is a systematic review of literature published in the recent 10 years. It is the objective of this paper to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of minimal access (MIS) spinal surgery and open spinal surgery for treating painful spine metastasis. Two research questions below were determined through a consensus among a panel of spine experts. A systematic review of literature on spinal surgery was conducted by searching PubMed with a combination of keywords including "metastatic", "metastasis", "metastases", "spinal", and "spine". Independent reviewers selected the articles for analysis after screening the titles, abstracts, and full texts, then extracted data and graded the quality of each paper according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Specific clinical questions were as follows: 1. In patients with spine metastatic disease, what is the impact of different surgical approaches (MIS versus open) on pain relief and functional outcome? 2. In patients with metastatic disease, what is the impact of different surgical approaches (MIS versus open) on local recurrence, survive rate, and complication? A total of 1,076 abstracts were identified using various keywords. 5 prospective (level II) and 12 retrospective articles (level III) were eligible for inclusion, involving a total of 979 cases of spine metastasis. There were 345 cases in 8 studies regarding the clinical evaluation of MIS spinal surgery and 634 cases in 9 studies regarding the clinical evaluation of open spinal surgery for spine metastasis. Both open spinal surgery and MIS seem to achieve the improvement of pain and neurological dysfunction through decompression and stabilization for patients with spine metastasis, but open surgery may involve more major complications with a trend of lower survival rates and higher recurrence rates compared to MIS. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 63% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
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 04 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,099
of 2,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,873
of 269,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#57
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,145 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 269,371 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.