The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
The role of fluorescence diagnosis in clinical practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s42074 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksander Sieroń, Karolina Sieroń-Stołtny, Aleksandra Kawczyk-Krupka, Wojciech Latos, Sebastian Kwiatek, Dariusz Straszak, Andrzej M Bugaj |
| Abstract |
Fluorescence diagnosis is a fast, easy, noninvasive, selective, and sensitive diagnostic tool for estimation of treatment results in oncology. In clinical practice the use of photodynamic diagnosis is focused on five targets: detection for prevention of malignant transformation precancerous changes, detection of neoplasmatic tissue in the early stages for fast removal, prevention of expansion and detection of recurrence of the cancer, monitoring therapy, and the possibility of excluding neoplasmatic disease. In this article, selected applications of fluorescence diagnosis at the Center for Laser Diagnostics and Therapy in Bytom, Poland, for each of these targets are presented. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 11 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 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 23 September 2013.
All research outputs
#21,445,559
of 26,316,305 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,622
of 3,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,587
of 208,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#27
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,316,305 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,027 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 208,516 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.