↓ Skip to main content

Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, May 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
2848 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
569 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial
Published in
The Lancet, May 2005
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66545-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierre J Guillou, Philip Quirke, Helen Thorpe, Joanne Walker, David G Jayne, Adrian MH Smith, Richard M Heath, Julia M Brown, for the MRC CLASICC trial group

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 569 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Morocco 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 549 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 74 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 69 12%
Other 60 11%
Student > Master 56 10%
Student > Postgraduate 55 10%
Other 163 29%
Unknown 92 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 367 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 3%
Engineering 13 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 1%
Other 23 4%
Unknown 132 23%
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 03 May 2022.
All research outputs
#5,747,592
of 26,391,249 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#20,735
of 42,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,673
of 69,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#69
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,391,249 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 42,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 70.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 69,683 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.