↓ Skip to main content

Extending the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease theory: does paternal diet contribute to breast cancer risk in daughters?

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Extending the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease theory: does paternal diet contribute to breast cancer risk in daughters?
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13058-016-0760-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Romanus, Patrick Neven, Adelheid Soubry

Abstract

The Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) theory focuses on the consequences of periconceptional and in utero exposures. A wide range of environmental conditions during early development are now being investigated as a driving force for epigenetic disruptions that enhance disease risk in later life, including cardiovascular, metabolic, endocrine, and mental disorders and even breast cancer. Most studies involve mother-child dyads, with less focus on environmental influences through the father. Over the last few years, however, new insights have been introduced on paternal effects and the plasticity of the epigenome of developing sperm cells have been proposed to underlie inheritable changes from ancestral exposures. The field is evolving rapidly and study results from animal models are promising. Although caution should be taken in translating animal data to humans, epidemiological findings also suggest a prominent role of the father. Therefore, we here propose an extension to the DOHaD theory to include also paternally inheritable influences.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 16 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 34%
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 25 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,170,530
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#1,329
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,232
of 326,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#14
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 326,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.