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 |
Current findings for recurring mutations in acute myeloid leukemia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-8722-4-36 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shinichiro Takahashi |
| Abstract |
The development of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a multistep process that requires at least two genetic abnormalities for the development of the disease. The identification of genetic mutations in AML has greatly advanced our understanding of leukemogenesis. Recently, the use of novel technologies, such as massively parallel DNA sequencing or high-resolution single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays, has allowed the identification of several novel recurrent gene mutations in AML. The aim of this review is to summarize the current findings for the identification of these gene mutations (Dnmt, TET2, IDH1/2, NPM1, ASXL1, etc.), most of which are frequently found in cytogenetically normal AML. The cooperative interactions of these molecular aberrations and their interactions with class I/II mutations are presented. The prognostic and predictive significances of these aberrations are also reviewed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 248 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 52 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 15% |
| Researcher | 33 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 31 | 12% |
| Unknown | 55 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 66 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 46 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Unknown | 60 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 October 2011.
All research outputs
#13,657,597
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#645
of 1,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,139
of 126,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 126,324 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.