↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Emerging treatment options for management of malignant ascites in patients with ovarian cancer

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Women's Health, August 2012
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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Emerging treatment options for management of malignant ascites in patients with ovarian cancer
Published in
International Journal of Women's Health, August 2012
DOI 10.2147/ijwh.s29467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krishnansu Tewari, Ramez N Eskander

Abstract

Malignant ascites affects approximately 10% of patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer and is associated with troublesome symptoms, including abdominal pressure and distension, dyspnea, bloating, pelvic pain, and bowel/bladder dysfunction. To date, no effective therapy has been identified for the treatment of malignant ascites in patients with recurrent, advanced ovarian cancer. In this article, we discuss currently existing options for the treatment of ascites associated with ovarian cancer, and review the literature as it pertains to novel, targeted therapies. Specifically, preclinical and clinical trials exploring the use of the antiangiogenic agents, bevacizumab and vascular endothelial growth factor-trap, as well as the nonangiogenic agent, catumaxomab, will be reviewed. Despite current limitations in treatment, knowledge regarding management options in the palliation of ascites is critical to practicing physicians. Ultimately, as with all novel therapies, symptom relief and treatment goals must be weighed against patient discomfort and potentially significant adverse events.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 4%
United Kingdom 1 4%
Denmark 1 4%
Unknown 22 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 20%
Student > Master 5 20%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 June 2019.
All research outputs
#3,301,191
of 17,360,236 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#141
of 613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,801
of 138,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#8
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 138,201 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.