↓ Skip to main content

Update of the human and mouse Fanconi anemia genes

Overview of attention for article published in Human Genomics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Update of the human and mouse Fanconi anemia genes
Published in
Human Genomics, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40246-015-0054-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongbin Dong, Daniel W. Nebert, Elspeth A. Bruford, David C. Thompson, Hans Joenje, Vasilis Vasiliou

Abstract

Fanconi anemia (FA) is a recessively inherited disease manifesting developmental abnormalities, bone marrow failure, and increased risk of malignancies. Whereas FA has been studied for nearly 90 years, only in the last 20 years have increasing numbers of genes been implicated in the pathogenesis associated with this genetic disease. To date, 19 genes have been identified that encode Fanconi anemia complementation group proteins, all of which are named or aliased, using the root symbol "FANC." Fanconi anemia subtype (FANC) proteins function in a common DNA repair pathway called "the FA pathway," which is essential for maintaining genomic integrity. The various FANC mutant proteins contribute to distinct steps associated with FA pathogenesis. Herein, we provide a review update of the 19 human FANC and their mouse orthologs, an evolutionary perspective on the FANC genes, and the functional significance of the FA DNA repair pathway in association with clinical disorders. This is an example of a set of genes--known to exist in vertebrates, invertebrates, plants, and yeast--that are grouped together on the basis of shared biochemical and physiological functions, rather than evolutionary phylogeny, and have been named on this basis by the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brunei Darussalam 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 19%
Student > Bachelor 23 16%
Student > Master 19 13%
Researcher 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 26 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 48 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 26 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Human Genomics
#190
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,287
of 392,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genomics
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 392,988 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.