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 |
Immunotherapy biomarkers 2016: overcoming the barriers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40425-017-0225-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James L. Gulley, Jay A. Berzofsky, Marcus O. Butler, Alessandra Cesano, Bernard A. Fox, Sacha Gnjatic, Sylvia Janetzki, Shyam Kalavar, Vaios Karanikas, Samir N. Khleif, Ilan Kirsch, Peter P. Lee, Cristina Maccalli, Holden Maecker, Jeffrey Schlom, Barbara Seliger, Janet Siebert, David F. Stroncek, Magdalena Thurin, Jianda Yuan, Lisa H. Butterfield |
| Abstract |
This report summarizes the symposium, 'Immunotherapy Biomarkers 2016: Overcoming the Barriers', which was held on April 1, 2016 at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. The symposium, cosponsored by the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), focused on emerging immunotherapy biomarkers, new technologies, current hurdles to further progress, and recommendations for advancing the field of biomarker development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 48% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 9% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 57% |
| Scientists | 5 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 25% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 15 November 2018.
All research outputs
#876,661
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#207
of 3,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,022
of 322,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 322,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.