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 |
Laparoscopy to predict the result of primary cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer patients (LapOvCa-trial): a multicentre randomized controlled study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2407-12-31 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marianne J Rutten, Katja N Gaarenstroom, Toon Van Gorp, Hannah S van Meurs, Henriette JG Arts, Patrick M Bossuyt, Henk G Ter Brugge, Ralph HM Hermans, Brent C Opmeer, Johanna MA Pijnenborg, Henk WR Schreuder, Eltjo MJ Schutter, Anje M Spijkerboer, Celesta WM Wensveen, Petra Zusterzeel, Ben Willem J Mol, Gemma G Kenter, Marrije R Buist |
| Abstract |
Standard treatment of advanced ovarian cancer is surgery and chemotherapy. The goal of surgery is to remove all macroscopic tumour, as the amount of residual tumour is the most important prognostic factor for survival. When removal off all tumour is considered not feasible, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in combination with interval debulking surgery (IDS) is performed. Current methods of staging are not always accurate in predicting surgical outcome, since approximately 40% of patients will have more than 1 cm residual tumour after primary debulking surgery (PDS). In this study we aim to assess whether adding laparoscopy to the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of advanced ovarian carcinoma may prevent unsuccessful primary debulking surgery for ovarian cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 23% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 60% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
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 21 January 2012.
All research outputs
#18,303,566
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,417
of 8,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,290
of 246,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#54
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,239 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 246,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.