↓ Skip to main content

In-vivo range verification analysis with in-beam PET data for patients treated with proton therapy at CNAO

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, September 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
In-vivo range verification analysis with in-beam PET data for patients treated with proton therapy at CNAO
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, September 2022
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2022.929949
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martina Moglioni, Aafke Christine Kraan, Guido Baroni, Giuseppe Battistoni, Nicola Belcari, Andrea Berti, Pietro Carra, Piergiorgio Cerello, Mario Ciocca, Angelica De Gregorio, Micol De Simoni, Damiano Del Sarto, Marco Donetti, Yunsheng Dong, Alessia Embriaco, Maria Evelina Fantacci, Veronica Ferrero, Elisa Fiorina, Marta Fischetti, Gaia Franciosini, Giuseppe Giraudo, Francesco Laruina, Davide Maestri, Marco Magi, Giuseppe Magro, Etesam Malekzadeh, Michela Marafini, Ilaria Mattei, Enrico Mazzoni, Paolo Mereu, Alfredo Mirandola, Matteo Morrocchi, Silvia Muraro, Ester Orlandi, Vincenzo Patera, Francesco Pennazio, Marco Pullia, Alessandra Retico, Angelo Rivetti, Manuel Dionisio Da Rocha Rolo, Valeria Rosso, Alessio Sarti, Angelo Schiavi, Adalberto Sciubba, Giancarlo Sportelli, Sara Tampellini, Marco Toppi, Giacomo Traini, Antonio Trigilio, Serena Marta Valle, Francesca Valvo, Barbara Vischioni, Viviana Vitolo, Richard Wheadon, Maria Giuseppina Bisogni

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 17%
Unspecified 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 7 39%
Engineering 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Unknown 7 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 October 2022.
All research outputs
#17,149,161
of 26,179,695 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#6,684
of 22,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,334
of 441,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#538
of 1,742 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,179,695 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,919 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 441,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,742 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.