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 |
Focal vs extended ablation in localized prostate cancer with irreversible electroporation; a multi-center randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-016-2332-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthijs J. V. Scheltema, Willemien van den Bos, Daniel M. de Bruin, Hessel Wijkstra, M. Pilar Laguna, Theo M. de Reijke, Jean JMCH de la Rosette |
| Abstract |
Current surgical and ablative treatment options for prostate cancer (PCa) may result in a high incidence of (temporary) incontinence, erectile dysfunction and/or bowel damage. These side effects are due to procedure related effects on adjacent structures including blood vessels, bowel, urethra and/or neurovascular bundle. Ablation with irreversible electroporation (IRE) has shown to be effective and safe in destroying PCa cells and also has the potential advantage of sparing surrounding tissue and vital structures, resulting in less impaired functional outcomes and maintaining men's quality of life. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT) on IRE in localized PCa, 200 patients with organ-confined, unilateral (T1c-T2b) low- to intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason sum score 6 and 7) on transperineal template-mapping biopsies (TTMB) will be included. Patients will be randomized into focal or extended ablation of cancer foci with IRE. Oncological efficacy will be determined by multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound imaging if available, TTMP and Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) follow-up. Patients will be evaluated up to 5 years on functional outcomes and quality of life with the use of standardized questionnaires. There is critical need of larger, standardized RCTs evaluating long-term oncological and functional outcomes before introducing IRE and other focal therapy modalities as an accepted and safe therapeutic option for PCa. This RCT will provide important short- and long-term data and elucidates the differences between focal or extended ablation of localized, unilateral low- to intermediate-risk PCa with IRE. Clinicaltrials.gov database registration number NCT01835977 . The Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects registration number NL50791.018.14. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 20% |
| Unknown | 28 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 41 | 36% |
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 06 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,156
of 8,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,386
of 301,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#61
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,483 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 301,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.