↓ Skip to main content

Small nucleolar RNA signatures as biomarkers for non-small-cell lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer, July 2010
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
242 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Small nucleolar RNA signatures as biomarkers for non-small-cell lung cancer
Published in
Molecular Cancer, July 2010
DOI 10.1186/1476-4598-9-198
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jipei Liao, Lei Yu, Yuping Mei, Maria Guarnera, Jun Shen, Ruiyun Li, Zhenqiu Liu, Feng Jiang

Abstract

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer death. Early detection of NSCLC will improve its outcome. The current techniques for NSCLC early detection are either invasive or have low accuracy. Molecular analyses of clinical specimens present promising diagnostic approaches. Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) play an important role in tumorigenesis and could be developed as biomarkers for cancer. Here we aimed to develop small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs), a common class of ncRNAs, as biomarkers for NSCLC early detection. The study comprised three phases: (1) profiling snoRNA signatures in 22 NSCLC tissues and matched noncancerous lung tissues by GeneChip Array, (2) validating expressions of the signatures by RT-qPCR in the tissues, and (3) evaluating plasma expressions of the snoRNAs in 37 NSCLC patients, 26 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and 22 healthy subjects.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Italy 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 163 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 23%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 7%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 26 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 54 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 45 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 33 19%
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 04 February 2024.
All research outputs
#2,921,892
of 24,074,720 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#173
of 1,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,081
of 97,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,074,720 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 1,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 97,125 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.