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 |
Double-arc volumetric modulated therapy improves dose distribution compared to static gantry IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy for adjuvant therapy of gastric cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-015-0420-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tao Zhang, Zhi-Wen Liang, Jun Han, Jian-Ping Bi, Zhi-Yong Yang, Hong Ma |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to compare the dose distributions of RapidArc (RA), static gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) as adjuvant radiotherapy modalities for the treatment of gastric cancer. Fifteen patients with gastric cancer that underwent limited lymphadenectomy of perigastric lymph nodes were included in this study. Dosimetric values for a total dose of 45 Gy (1.8 Gy/day) were calculated for the RapidArc, IMRT, and 3DCRT modalities. The following parameters were compared: D99%, D1%, V95%, V107%, and conformity and homogeneity index values (CI and HI, respectively) for the planned target volume (PTV). Dose volume histogram (DVH) and dose distribution of the organs at risk (OAR), as the maximal dose to the spinal cord, V30 and V40 of the small bowel, and V20, V30 of liver and kidney were also assessed respectively. RA, IMRT, and 3DCRT all achieved desirable PTV coverage. However, RA and IMRT significantly decreased D1% and V107%, and provided better CI and HI values compared with 3DCRT (P <0.05). Moreover, RA also achieved a significantly lower maximum dose for the spinal cord, liver V30, and kidney V20 compared to IMRT and 3DCRT; while the mean dose for these three organ types did not differ for the RA, IMRT, and 3DCRT plans. Both RA and IMRT achieved favorable PTV coverage compared to 3DCRT. In addition, RA achieved better dosimetry than IMRT and 3DCRT, and provided better protection for the spinal cord, liver, and kidneys. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Nepal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 29% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 13 | 32% |
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 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,225,412
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#804
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,356
of 266,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#32
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 266,311 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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.