↓ Skip to main content

Cancer: tilting at windmills?

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer, September 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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Cancer: tilting at windmills?
Published in
Molecular Cancer, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1476-4598-12-108
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prakash Kulkarni, Takumi Shiraishi, Rahul V Kulkarni

Abstract

One of the striking characteristics of cancer cells is their phenotypic diversity and ability to switch phenotypes in response to environmental fluctuations. Such phenotypic changes (e.g. from drug-sensitive to drug-resistant), which are critical for survival and proliferation, are widely believed to arise due to mutations in the cancer cell's genome. However, there is growing concern that such a deterministic view is not entirely consistent with multiple lines of evidence which indicate that cancer can arise in the absence of mutations and can even be reversed to normalcy despite the mutations. In this Commentary, we wish to present an alternate view that highlights how stochasticity in protein interaction networks (PINs) may play a key role in cancer initiation and progression. We highlight the potential role of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) and submit that targeting IDPs can lead to new insights and treatment protocols for cancer.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 35%
Student > Master 3 15%
Researcher 3 15%
Professor 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Chemistry 2 10%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,273,260
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#243
of 1,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,371
of 215,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 215,064 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.