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.
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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Why Do Parotid Pleomorphic Adenomas Recur? A Systematic Review of Pathological and Surgical Variables
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Surgery, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fsurg.2017.00026 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pavel Dulguerov, Jelena Todic, Marc Pusztaszeri, Naif H. Alotaibi |
| Abstract |
The recurrence of pleomorphic adenoma (PA) has been extensively debated, mostly in relation to the extent of parotidectomy. A systematic review was undertaken to clarify the surgical and pathological variables related to PA recurrence. Inclusion criteria were as follows: English literature, and prospective or retrospective studies. Exclusion criteria were as follows: single case reports, reviews, and lack of PA recurrence data. Pathology-related variables associated with recurrence include the histological subtype, the thickness and incompleteness of the tumor capsule, pseudopodia, and satellite nodules. Surgery-related variables associated with recurrence are the presence of intact margins and tumor puncture or spillage. Other factors are the size of the tumor and the age of patient. Myxoid subtypes of PA tend to have incomplete and thinner capsules and to recur more frequently. Surgical variables related to recurrence include positive margins and tumor spillage. Myxoid and/or large PA, especially in young patients, should be approached more cautiously to avoid recurrences. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 60% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,281,255
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#255
of 2,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,086
of 309,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#1
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,953 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 309,986 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.