↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the management of non-small-cell lung cancer: Clinical impact and patient perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 128)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the management of non-small-cell lung cancer: Clinical impact and patient perspectives
Published in
Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy, March 2018
DOI 10.2147/lctt.s129833
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elysia K Donovan, Anand Swaminath

Abstract

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a new technology in radiotherapy delivery, allowing for potentially curative treatment in many patients previously felt not to be candidates for radical surgical resection of stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several studies have demonstrated very high local control rates using SBRT, and more recent data have suggested overall survival may approach that of surgery in operable patients. However, SBRT is not without unique toxicities, and the balance of toxicity, and effect on patient-reported quality of life need to be considered with respect to oncologic outcomes. We therefore aim to review SBRT in the context of important patient-related factors, including quality of life in several domains (and in comparison to other therapies such as conventional radiation, surgery, or no treatment). We will also describe scenarios in which SBRT may be reasonably offered (i.e. elderly patients and those with severe COPD), and where it may need to be approached with some caution due to increased risks of toxicity (i.e. tumor location, patients with interstitial lung disease). In total, we hope to characterize the physical, emotional, and functional consequences of SBRT, in relation to other management strategies, in order to aid the clinician in deciding whether SBRT is the optimal treatment choice for each patient with early stage NSCLC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 17%
Other 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 19 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 August 2019.
All research outputs
#6,335,799
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy
#27
of 128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,837
of 344,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 128 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 344,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them