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 |
Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: correlation between histopathological features and age of patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-014-0227-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Arantes Perez, Débora Balabram, Marcio De Almeida Salles, Helenice Gobbi |
| Abstract |
BackgroundThe histopathological subtype, nuclear grade and presence or absence of comedonecrosis are established as critical elements in the reporting of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. The aims of this study were to determine the frequencies of morphological subtypes of DCIS, nuclear grade and comedonecrosis; to compare the age of patients with the histopathological characteristics of DCIS, and to assess the agreement of grade between in situ and invasive components in DCIS cases that were associated with invasive carcinoma.MethodsWe evaluated a series of 403 cases of DCIS, pure or associated with invasive mammary carcinoma, consecutively identified from the histopathology files of the Breast Pathology Laboratory, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, from 2003 to 2008.ResultsDCIS displayed a single growth pattern in most cases (55.1%) and the solid subtype was the most common morphology (42.2% of the total). High-grade DCIS was identified in 293/403 cases (72.7%) and comedonecrosis was present in 222/403 cases (55%). Among DCIS with a single architectural pattern, high grade was more common in the solid subtype (151/168 cases, 89.9%; p¿<¿0.001). Only 32% of tumours with a cribriform pattern had high nuclear grade. Comedonecrosis was more common in the solid morphology than in the cribriform, papillary and micropapillary subtypes (p¿<¿0.001). Patients with high-grade DCIS were younger in relation to patients with low-grade DCIS (p¿=¿0.027) and patients with tumours with comedonecrosis were also younger in comparison to patients with tumours without comedonecrosis (p¿=¿0.003). Fair agreement was observed between in situ and invasive components with regard to grade (weighted kappa¿=¿0.23).ConclusionsThe high nuclear grade and the presence of comedonecrosis were identified more frequently in younger patients and more often correlated with the solid pattern of DCIS.Virtual SlidesThe virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_227. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Brazil | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Namibia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 6 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 May 2021.
All research outputs
#12,907,471
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#304
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,168
of 360,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#10
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 360,895 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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.