↓ Skip to main content

Open versus laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (the Oslo-CoMet study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Open versus laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (the Oslo-CoMet study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0577-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Åsmund Avdem Fretland, Airazat M Kazaryan, Bjørn Atle Bjørnbeth, Kjersti Flatmark, Marit Helen Andersen, Tor Inge Tønnessen, Gudrun Maria Waaler Bjørnelv, Morten Wang Fagerland, Ronny Kristiansen, Karl Øyri, Bjørn Edwin

Abstract

Laparoscopic liver resection is used in specialized centers all over the world. However, laparoscopic liver resection has never been compared with open liver resection in a prospective, randomized trial.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Unknown 134 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Other 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 41 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 41%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 54 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,155,167
of 25,393,528 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#13
of 47 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,667
of 272,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#11
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,393,528 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 47 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one scored the same or higher as 34 of them.
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 272,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.