↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacogenetic testing affects choice of therapy among women considering tamoxifen treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, October 2011
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
210 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
Pharmacogenetic testing affects choice of therapy among women considering tamoxifen treatment
Published in
Genome Medicine, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/gm280
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy Lorizio, Hope Rugo, Mary S Beattie, Simone Tchu, Teri Melese, Michelle Melisko, Alan HB Wu, H Jeffrey Lawrence, Michele Nikoloff, Elad Ziv

Abstract

Pharmacogenetic testing holds major promise in allowing physicians to tailor therapy to patients based on genotype. However, there is little data on the impact of pharmacogenetic test results on patient and clinician choice of therapy. CYP2D6 testing among tamoxifen users offers a potential test case of the use of pharmacogenetic testing in the clinic. We evaluated the effect of CYP2D6 testing in clinical practice to determine whether genotype results affected choice of hormone therapy in a prospective cohort study.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Croatia 1 <1%
Unknown 200 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 16%
Student > Master 31 15%
Student > Bachelor 26 12%
Other 11 5%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 42 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 55 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 3%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 43 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 09 March 2014.
All research outputs
#2,073,740
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#461
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,112
of 144,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 144,573 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.