↓ Skip to main content

Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, August 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00464-013-3163-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah S. Keller, Anthony J. Senagore, Justin K. Lawrence, Brad J. Champagne, Conor P. Delaney

Abstract

During the past 20 years, laparoscopy has revolutionized colorectal surgery. With proven benefits in patient outcomes and healthcare utilization, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has steadily increased in use. Robotic surgery, a new addition to colorectal surgery, has been suggested to facilitate and overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic resection (RALR) to laparoscopic resections (LAP) in colorectal surgery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 19%
Student > Postgraduate 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 66%
Unspecified 3 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 4 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,416,654
of 12,902,491 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#753
of 3,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,509
of 157,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#9
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,902,491 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,804 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 157,484 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.