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 |
Appraisal of the technologies and review of the genomic landscape of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13058-015-0586-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jia-Min B. Pang, Kylie L. Gorringe, Stephen Q. Wong, Alexander Dobrovic, Ian G. Campbell, Stephen B. Fox |
| Abstract |
Ductal carcinoma in situ is a biologically diverse entity. Whereas some lesions are cured by local surgical excision, others recur as in situ disease or progress to invasive carcinoma with subsequent potential for metastatic spread. Reliable prognostic biomarkers are therefore desirable for appropriate clinical management but remain elusive. In common with invasive breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ exhibits many genomic changes, predominantly copy number alterations. Although studies have revealed the genomic heterogeneity within individual ductal carcinoma in situ lesions and the association of certain copy number alterations with nuclear grade, none of the genomic changes defined so far is consistently associated with invasive transformation or recurrence risk in pure ductal carcinoma in situ. This article will review the current landscape of genomic alterations in ductal carcinoma in situ and their potential as prognostic biomarkers together with the technologies used to define these. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| France | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 18% |
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 38% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 April 2016.
All research outputs
#8,474,037
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#966
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,178
of 264,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#17
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 264,135 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.