↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Exenterative surgery for recurrent gynaecological malignancies

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 tweeters
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
Title
Exenterative surgery for recurrent gynaecological malignancies
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010449.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Ang, Andrew Bryant, Desmond PJ Barton, Christophe Pomel, Raj Naik

Abstract

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. Gynaecological cancers (i.e. cancers affecting the ovaries, uterus, cervix, vulva and vagina) are among the most common cancers in women. Unfortunately, given the nature of the disease, cancer can recur or progress in some patients. Although the management of early-stage cancers is relatively straightforward, with lower associated morbidity and mortality, the surgical management of advanced and recurrent cancers (including persistent or progressive cancers) is significantly more complicated, often requiring very extensive procedures. Pelvic exenterative surgery involves removal of some or all of the pelvic organs. Exenterative surgery for persistent or recurrent cancer after initial treatment is difficult and is usually associated with significant perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, it provides women with a chance of cure that otherwise may not be possible. In carefully selected patients, it may also have a place in palliation of symptoms. The biology of recurrent ovarian cancer differs from that of other gynaecological cancers; it is often responsive to chemotherapy and is not included in this review.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 20 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 52 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 16%
Computer Science 4 3%
Psychology 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 53 39%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 May 2022.
All research outputs
#3,092,140
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,768
of 12,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,835
of 307,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#107
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 307,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 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 50% of its contemporaries.