| Title |
The Danish Sarcoma Database
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s99495 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Holmberg Jørgensen, Gunnar Schwarz Lausten, Alma B Pedersen |
| Abstract |
The aim of the database is to gather information about sarcomas treated in Denmark in order to continuously monitor and improve the quality of sarcoma treatment in a local, a national, and an international perspective. Patients in Denmark diagnosed with a sarcoma, both skeletal and ekstraskeletal, are to be registered since 2009. The database contains information about appearance of symptoms; date of receiving referral to a sarcoma center; date of first visit; whether surgery has been performed elsewhere before referral, diagnosis, and treatment; tumor characteristics such as location, size, malignancy grade, and growth pattern; details on treatment (kind of surgery, amount of radiation therapy, type and duration of chemotherapy); complications of treatment; local recurrence and metastases; and comorbidity. In addition, several quality indicators are registered in order to measure the quality of care provided by the hospitals and make comparisons between hospitals and with international standards. Demographic patient-specific data such as age, sex, region of living, comorbidity, World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases - tenth edition codes and TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours, and date of death (after yearly coupling to the Danish Civil Registration System). Data quality and completeness are currently secured. The Danish Sarcoma Database is population based and includes sarcomas occurring in Denmark since 2009. It is a valuable tool for monitoring sarcoma incidence and quality of treatment and its improvement, postoperative complications, and recurrence within 5 years follow-up. The database is also a valuable research tool to study the impact of technical and medical interventions on prognosis of sarcoma patients. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 26% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 52% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
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 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#732
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,211
of 332,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#29
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 332,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.