↓ Skip to main content

Sentinel Node Biopsy Using a Magnetic Tracer Versus Standard Technique: The SentiMAG Multicentre Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
Title
Sentinel Node Biopsy Using a Magnetic Tracer Versus Standard Technique: The SentiMAG Multicentre Trial
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, December 2013
DOI 10.1245/s10434-013-3379-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Douek, Joost Klaase, Ian Monypenny, Ashutosh Kothari, Katalin Zechmeister, Douglas Brown, Lynda Wyld, Philip Drew, Hans Garmo, Olorunsola Agbaje, Quentin Pankhurst, Bauke Anninga, Maarten Grootendorst, Bennie ten Haken, Margaret A. Hall-Craggs, Arnie Purushotham, Sarah Pinder

Abstract

The SentiMAG Multicentre Trial evaluated a new magnetic technique for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) against the standard (radioisotope and blue dye or radioisotope alone). The magnetic technique does not use radiation and provides both a color change (brown dye) and a handheld probe for node localization. The primary end point of this trial was defined as the proportion of sentinel nodes detected with each technique (identification rate).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Slovakia 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 77 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 22%
Student > Master 17 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Unspecified 7 9%
Other 22 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 54%
Unspecified 10 12%
Chemistry 5 6%
Physics and Astronomy 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 15 19%

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 17 December 2013.
All research outputs
#7,487,129
of 12,419,165 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#1,816
of 2,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,000
of 202,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#23
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,419,165 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 2,896 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 202,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.