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 |
Clinical utility of RAS mutations in thyroid cancer: a blurred picture now emerging clearer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-016-0559-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mingzhao Xing |
| Abstract |
RAS mutations play an important role in thyroid tumorigenesis. Considerable effort has been made in the last decade to apply RAS mutations as molecular markers to the clinical management of thyroid nodules and thyroid cancer. Yet, for the low diagnostic sensitivities and specificities of RAS mutations, when used alone, and for their uncertain role in the clinical outcomes of thyroid cancer, it has been unclear how to appropriately use them to assist the management of thyroid nodules and thyroid cancer. Studies from recent years, now added from the Alexander group, have shed light on this issue, making a blurred clinical picture now emerge clearer-RAS mutations, when combined with other genetic markers, have high diagnostic negative predictive values for thyroid cancer; cytologically benign thyroid nodules, including those positive for RAS mutations, have long-term clinical stability when non-surgically managed; and differentiated thyroid cancers harboring RAS mutations alone have an excellent prognosis. This progress in understanding RAS mutations in thyroid cancer is showing a major impact on molecular-based practice in the management of thyroid cancer.Please see related research articles: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0554-1 and http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0419-z. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 30 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 34 | 47% |
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 28 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,437,241
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#3,207
of 3,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,100
of 396,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#42
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 396,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.