↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Current and emerging treatments for uterine myoma – an update

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Women's Health, August 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Current and emerging treatments for uterine myoma – an update
Published in
International Journal of Women's Health, August 2011
DOI 10.2147/ijwh.s15710
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nirmala Duhan

Abstract

Uterine myomas, the most common benign, solid, pelvic tumors in women, occur in 20%-40% of women in their reproductive years and form the most common indication for hysterectomy. Various factors affect the choice of the best treatment modality for a given patient. Asymptomatic myomas may be managed by reassurance and careful follow up. Medical therapy should be tried as a first line of treatment for symptomatic myomas, while surgical treatment should be reserved only for appropriate indications. Hysterectomy has its place in myoma management in its definitiveness. However, myomectomy, rather than hysterectomy, should be performed when subsequent childbearing is a consideration. Preoperative gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog treatment before myomectomy decreases the size and vascularity of the myoma but may render the capsule more fibrous and difficult to resect. Uterine artery embolization is an effective standard alternative for women with large symptomatic myomas who are poor surgical risks or wish to avoid major surgery. Its effects on future fertility need further evaluation in larger studies. Serial follow-up without surgery for growth and/or development of symptoms is advisable for asymptomatic women, particularly those approaching menopause. The present article is incorporated with multiple clear clinical photographs and simplified elaboration of the available management options for these tumors of uterine smooth muscle to facilitate clear understanding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 104 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 19%
Student > Postgraduate 17 16%
Student > Master 9 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 6 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 34 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 51%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 37 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 June 2019.
All research outputs
#6,111,780
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#244
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,240
of 119,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 119,652 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 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.