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 |
Metastatic tumor evolution and organoid modeling implicate TGFBR2as a cancer driver in diffuse gastric cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-014-0428-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lincoln D Nadauld, Sarah Garcia, Georges Natsoulis, John M Bell, Laura Miotke, Erik S Hopmans, Hua Xu, Reetesh K Pai, Curt Palm, John F Regan, Hao Chen, Patrick Flaherty, Akifumi Ootani, Nancy R Zhang, James M Ford, Calvin J Kuo, Hanlee P Ji |
| Abstract |
Gastric cancer is the second-leading cause of global cancer deaths, with metastatic disease representing the primary cause of mortality. To identify candidate drivers involved in oncogenesis and tumor evolution, we conduct an extensive genome sequencing analysis of metastatic progression in a diffuse gastric cancer. This involves a comparison between a primary tumor from a hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome proband and its recurrence as an ovarian metastasis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Brazil | 1 | 14% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 155 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 20% |
| Researcher | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 44 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 14% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 February 2024.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,945
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,987
of 247,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#58
of 100 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 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 247,197 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.