↓ Skip to main content

Special considerations in prognostic research in cancer involving genetic polymorphisms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Special considerations in prognostic research in cancer involving genetic polymorphisms
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sevtap Savas, Geoffrey Liu, Wei Xu

Abstract

Analysis of genetic polymorphisms may help identify putative prognostic markers and determine the biological basis of variable prognosis in patients. However, in contrast to other variables commonly used in the prognostic studies, there are special considerations when studying genetic polymorphisms. For example, variable inheritance patterns (recessive, dominant, codominant, and additive genetic models) need to be explored to identify the specific genotypes associated with the outcome. In addition, several characteristics of genetic polymorphisms, such as their minor allele frequency and linkage disequilibrium among multiple polymorphisms, and the population substructure of the cohort investigated need to be accounted for in the analyses. In addition, in cancer research due to the genomic differences between the tumor and non-tumor DNA, differences in the genetic information obtained using these tissues need to be carefully assessed in prognostic studies. In this article, we review these and other considerations specific to genetic polymorphism by focusing on genetic prognostic studies in cancer.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 20%
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 07 May 2015.
All research outputs
#1,651,472
of 14,976,343 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,171
of 2,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,588
of 156,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,976,343 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 156,609 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them