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 |
Low-grade cribriform cystadenocarcinoma of salivary glands: report of two cases and review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-1596-8-28 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liang Wang, Yang Liu, Xuyong Lin, Di Zhang, Qingchang Li, Xueshan Qiu, En-Hua Wang |
| Abstract |
Low-grade cribriform cystadenocarcinoma (LGCCC) is a recently described rare tumor of salivary gland which exhibits clinically indolent behavior. This tumor predominantly consists of intraductal components and frequently exhibits papillary-cystic or cribriform proliferation pattern. Considering the histological features of LGCCC, it should be distinguished with papillocystic variant of acinic cell carcinoma, conventional salivary duct carcinoma, cystadenocarcinoma, polymorphous low-grade adenocarcinoma, carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma and mammary analogue secretory carcinoma. Herein, we presented two cases of LGCCC. One arose in the left parotid region in a 48-year-old male, and the other one arose in the right parotid gland in a 59-year-old female. For both cases, immunohistochemically, the luminal tumor cells showed diffuse expression of CK and S100; p63 and smooth muscle actin displayed a continuous rim of myoepithelial cells around all tumor islets; no myoepithelial cells were admixed with the luminal cells. Both patients were alive with no tumor recurrence or metastasis at follow-up. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 16 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 February 2013.
All research outputs
#17,679,313
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#672
of 1,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,228
of 192,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#20
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,119 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 192,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.