↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Positron emission tomography-adapted therapy for first-line treatment in individuals with Hodgkin lymphoma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
Title
Positron emission tomography-adapted therapy for first-line treatment in individuals with Hodgkin lymphoma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010533.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Therese Sickinger, Bastian von Tresckow, Carsten Kobe, Andreas Engert, Peter Borchmann, Nicole Skoetz

Abstract

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a B-cell lymphoma accounting for 10% to 15% of all lymphoma in industrialised countries. It has a bimodal age distribution with one peak around the age of 30 years and another after the age of 60 years. Although HL accounts for fewer than 1% of all neoplasms worldwide, it is considered to be one of the most common malignancies in young adults and, with cure rates of 90%, one of the most curable cancers worldwide. Current treatment options for HL comprise more- or less-intensified regimens of chemotherapy plus radiotherapy, depending on disease stage. [18F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET, also called PET scanning) is an imaging tool that can be used to illustrate a tumour's metabolic activity, stage and progression. Therefore, it could be used as a standard interim procedure during HL treatment, to help distinguish between individuals who are good or poor early responders to therapy. Subsequent therapy could then be de-escalated in PET-negative individuals (good responders) or escalated in those who are PET-positive (poor responders). It is currently unknown whether such response-adapted therapeutic strategies are of benefit to individuals in terms of overall and progression-free survival, and the incidence of long-term adverse events (AEs).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 124 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 28 22%
Unknown 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 27 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,554,572
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,846
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,219
of 215,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#201
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 215,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.