↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

What is this page? Embed badge

Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for the treatment of solid abdominal and thoracic neoplasms in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
Summary Blogs Twitter Facebook Dimensions citations
Title
Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for the treatment of solid abdominal and thoracic neoplasms in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008403.pub3
Pubmed ID
25560834
Authors

Elvira C van Dalen, Manou S de Lijster, Lieve GJ Leijssen, Erna MC Michiels, Leontien CM Kremer, Huib N Caron, Daniel C Aronson

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is an accepted surgical technique for the treatment of a variety of benign diseases. Presently, the use of MIS in patients with cancer is progressing. However, the role of MIS in children with solid neoplasms is less clear than it is in adults. Although the use of diagnostic MIS to obtain biopsy specimens for pathology is accepted in paediatric surgical oncology, there is limited evidence to support the use of MIS for the resection of malignancies. This review is the second update of a previously published Cochrane review.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 24%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 32 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 41 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,312,794
of 23,368,819 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,963
of 12,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,640
of 355,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#120
of 283 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,368,819 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 355,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 283 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 57% of its contemporaries.

This page is hosted by Altmetric on behalf of Cochrane Library.