↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
241 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 Mendeley
Title
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004078.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sune Høirup Petersen, Henrik Harling, Lene Tschemerinsky Kirkeby, Peer Wille-Jørgensen, Simone Mocellin

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the Western world. Apart from surgery - which remains the mainstay of treatment for resectable primary tumours - postoperative (i.e., adjuvant) chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based regimens is now the standard treatment in Dukes' C (TNM stage III) colon tumours i.e. tumours with metastases in the regional lymph nodes but no distant metastases. In contrast, the evidence for recommendations of adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer is sparse. In Europe it is generally acknowledged that locally advanced rectal tumours receive preoperative (i.e., neoadjuvant) downstaging by radiotherapy (or chemoradiotion), whereas in the US postoperative chemoradiotion is considered the treatment of choice in all Dukes' C rectal cancers. Overall, no universal consensus exists on the adjuvant treatment of surgically resectable rectal carcinoma; moreover, no formal systematic review and meta-analysis has been so far performed on this subject.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Ecuador 2 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 197 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 12%
Other 24 12%
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 46 22%
Unknown 36 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 127 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 45 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 January 2018.
All research outputs
#8,391,640
of 15,988,845 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,603
of 11,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,737
of 126,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#82
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,988,845 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 126,933 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.