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 |
Comparative review of human and canine osteosarcoma: morphology, epidemiology, prognosis, treatment and genetics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13028-017-0341-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Siobhan Simpson, Mark David Dunning, Simone de Brot, Llorenç Grau-Roma, Nigel Patrick Mongan, Catrin Sian Rutland |
| Abstract |
Osteosarcoma (OSA) is a rare cancer in people. However OSA incidence rates in dogs are 27 times higher than in people. Prognosis in both species is relatively poor, with 5 year OSA survival rates in people not having improved in decades. For dogs, 1 year survival rates are only around ~ 45%. Improved and novel treatment regimens are urgently required to improve survival in both humans and dogs with OSA. Utilising information from genetic studies could assist in this in both species, with the higher incidence rates in dogs contributing to the dog population being a good model of human disease. This review compares the clinical characteristics, gross morphology and histopathology, aetiology, epidemiology, and genetics of canine and human OSA. Finally, the current position of canine OSA genetic research is discussed and areas for additional work within the canine population are identified. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 25% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 240 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 240 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 10% |
| Researcher | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 38 | 16% |
| Unknown | 80 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 60 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 7% |
| Engineering | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 10% |
| Unknown | 88 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,305,383
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#139
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,686
of 338,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 338,208 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.