↓ Skip to main content

Chromosomal aberrations and aneuploidy in oral potentially malignant lesions: distinctive features for tongue

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
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
Chromosomal aberrations and aneuploidy in oral potentially malignant lesions: distinctive features for tongue
Published in
BMC Cancer, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-11-445
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrizio Castagnola, Davide Malacarne, Paola Scaruffi, Massimo Maffei, Alessandra Donadini, Emanuela Di Nallo, Simona Coco, Gian Paolo Tonini, Monica Pentenero, Sergio Gandolfo, Walter Giaretti

Abstract

The mucosae of the oral cavity are different at the histological level but appear all equally exposed to common genotoxic agents. As a result of this exposure, changes in the mucosal epithelia may develop giving rise to Oral Potentially Malignant Lesions (OPMLs), which with time may in turn progress to Oral Squamous Cell Carcinomas (OSCCs). Therefore, much effort should be devoted to identify features able to predict the likeliness of progression associated with an OPML. Such features may be helpful in assisting the clinician to establish both appropriate therapies and follow-up schedules. Here, we report a pilot study that compared the occurrence of DNA aneuploidy and chromosomal copy number aberrations (CNAs) in the OPMLs from different oral anatomical subsites.

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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
India 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 6 20%
Student > Master 6 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Psychology 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 October 2011.
All research outputs
#15,236,094
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,098
of 8,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,154
of 135,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#45
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,237 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 135,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.