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 |
Rare key functional domain missense substitutions in MRE11A, RAD50, and NBNcontribute to breast cancer susceptibility: results from a Breast Cancer Family Registry case-control mutation-screening study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/bcr3669 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Damiola, Maroulio Pertesi, Javier Oliver, Florence Le Calvez-Kelm, Catherine Voegele, Erin L Young, Nivonirina Robinot, Nathalie Forey, Geoffroy Durand, Maxime P Vallée, Kayoko Tao, Terrell C Roane, Gareth J Williams, John L Hopper, Melissa C Southey, Irene L Andrulis, Esther M John, David E Goldgar, Fabienne Lesueur, Sean V Tavtigian |
| Abstract |
The MRE11A-RAD50-Nibrin (MRN) complex plays several critical roles related to repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Inherited mutations in the three components predispose to genetic instability disorders and the MRN genes have been implicated in breast cancer susceptibility, but the underlying data are not entirely convincing. Here, we address two related questions: (1) are some rare MRN variants intermediate-risk breast cancer susceptibility alleles, and if so (2) do the MRN genes follow a BRCA1/BRCA2 pattern wherein most susceptibility alleles are protein truncating variants, or do they follow an ATM/CHEK2 pattern wherein half or more of the susceptibility alleles are missense substitutions? |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| 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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 19% |
| Researcher | 27 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 14% |
| Unknown | 28 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 41 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 36 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 June 2014.
All research outputs
#3,622,206
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#417
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,657
of 242,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#6
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 242,007 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.