Title |
Palliative endobronchial brachytherapy for non-small cell lung cancer
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004284.pub3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ludovic Reveiz, José-Ramón Rueda, Andrés Felipe Cardona |
Abstract |
This is an updated version of the original review published in Issue 2, 2008 of The Cochrane Library. Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) constitute about 80% of all lung cancer cases. Although surgery is the only curative treatment of NSCLC, fewer than 20% of tumors can be radically resected. Radiotherapy is one of the main treatment modalities in lung cancer, contributing to both its cure and palliation. Endobronchial brachytherapy (EBB) has been used as one approach to improve local control either alone or in combination with other treatments. |
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 % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 126 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 20 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
Other | 16 | 13% |
Unknown | 43 | 34% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 36% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
Psychology | 9 | 7% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
Other | 6 | 5% |
Unknown | 47 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#6,925,375
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,556
of 12,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,508
of 278,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#120
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 278,790 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 192 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.