↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer: is it ready for prime time?

Overview of attention for article published in Breast cancer targets and therapy, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer: is it ready for prime time?
Published in
Breast cancer targets and therapy, March 2017
DOI 10.2147/bctt.s127583
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tabitha Chan, Poh Wee Tan, Johann Tang

Abstract

Whole breast external beam radiotherapy (WBEBRT) is commonly used as an essential arm in the treatment management of women with early-stage breast cancer. Dosimetry planning for conventional WBEBRT typically involves a pair of tangential fields. Advancement in radiation technology and techniques has the potential to improve treatment outcomes with clinically meaningful long-term benefits. However, this advancement must be balanced with safety and improved efficacy. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is an advanced technique that shows promise in improving the planning process and radiation delivery. Early data on utilizing IMRT for WBEBRT demonstrate more homogenous dose distribution with reduction in organs at risk doses. This translates to toxicities reduction. The two common descriptors for IMRT are forward-planning "fields in field" and inverse planning. Unlike IMRT for other organs, the aim of IMRT for breast planning is to achieve dose homogeneity and not organ conformality. The aim of this paper was to evaluate whether IMRT is ready for prime time based on these three points: 1) workload impact, 2) the clinical impact on the patient's quality of life, and 3) the appropriateness and applicability to clinical practice.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 18%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 47%
Physics and Astronomy 5 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 5 15%

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 06 April 2017.
All research outputs
#7,144,841
of 11,467,908 outputs
Outputs from Breast cancer targets and therapy
#89
of 140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,047
of 264,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast cancer targets and therapy
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,467,908 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. 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 264,265 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.