↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Uterine sarcoma – current perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Women's Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
Title
Uterine sarcoma – current perspectives
Published in
International Journal of Women's Health, August 2017
DOI 10.2147/ijwh.s117754
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Benson, Aisha B Miah

Abstract

Uterine sarcomas comprise a group of rare tumors with differing tumor biology, natural history and response to treatment. Diagnosis is often made following surgery for presumed benign disease. Currently, preoperative imaging does not reliably distinguish between benign leiomyomas and other malignant pathology. Uterine leiomyosarcoma is the most common sarcoma, but other subtypes include endometrial stromal sarcoma (low grade and high grade), undifferentiated uterine sarcoma and adenosarcoma. Clinical trials have shown no definite survival benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy and have been hampered by the rarity and heterogeneity of these disease types. There is a role of adjuvant treatment in carefully selected cases following multidisciplinary discussion at sarcoma reference centers. In patients with metastatic disease, systemic chemotherapy can then be considered. There is activity of a number of agents, including doxorubicin, trabectedin, gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, eribulin and pazopanib. Patients should be considered for clinical trial entry where possible. Close international collaboration is important to allow progress in this group of diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 34 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 44 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 30 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,699,052
of 25,126,845 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#164
of 866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,803
of 322,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,126,845 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 866 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 322,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.