↓ Skip to main content

Disease-free survival after complete mesocolic excision compared with conventional colon cancer surgery: a retrospective, population-based study

Overview of attention for article published in Lancet Oncology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge
20

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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
285 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Disease-free survival after complete mesocolic excision compared with conventional colon cancer surgery: a retrospective, population-based study
Published in
Lancet Oncology, February 2015
DOI 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)71168-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claus Anders Bertelsen, Anders Ulrich Neuenschwander, Jens Erik Jansen, Michael Wilhelmsen, Anders Kirkegaard-Klitbo, Jutaka Reilin Tenma, Birgitte Bols, Peter Ingeholm, Leif Ahrenst Rasmussen, Lars Vedel Jepsen, Else Refsgaard Iversen, Bent Kristensen, Ismail Gögenur

Abstract

Application of the principles of total mesorectal excision to colon cancer by undertaking complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been proposed to improve oncological outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether implementation of CME improved disease-free survival compared with conventional colon resection.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Slovakia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 192 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 35 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 14%
Student > Master 21 11%
Other 18 9%
Student > Postgraduate 17 9%
Other 52 26%
Unknown 26 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 121 61%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 47 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 18 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,168,951
of 17,487,706 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Oncology
#1,374
of 5,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,930
of 312,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Oncology
#35
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,487,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,626 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 312,103 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.