↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Bendamustine for patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies including chronic lymphocytic leukaemia

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
Bendamustine for patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies including chronic lymphocytic leukaemia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009045.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liat Vidal, Anat Gafter-Gvili, Ronit Gurion, Pia Raanani, Martin Dreyling, Ofer Shpilberg

Abstract

Indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies include follicular lymphoma, small lymphocytic lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma and marginal zone lymphomas. Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is a lymphoid malignancy similar to small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in its leukaemic phase.Indolent lymphoid malignancies including CLL are characterised by slow growth, a high initial response rate and a relapsing and progressive disease course. Advanced-stage indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies are often incurable. If symptoms or progressive disease occur, chemotherapy plus rituximab is indicated. No chemotherapy regimen has been shown to improve overall survival compared to a different regimen.Bendamustine is efficacious in the treatment of patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies. A number of randomised controlled trials have examined the effect of bendamustine compared to other chemotherapy regimens in these patients. Improved disease control with no survival benefit is shown.

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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Other 11 11%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 22 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Psychology 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,665,425
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,264
of 12,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,586
of 168,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#208
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,298 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 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 168,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.