↓ Skip to main content

Is systems biology a promising approach to resolve controversies in cancer research?

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Cell International, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Is systems biology a promising approach to resolve controversies in cancer research?
Published in
Cancer Cell International, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1475-2867-12-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana M Soto, Carlos Sonnenschein

Abstract

At the beginning of the 21st century cancer research has reached an impasse similar to that experienced in developmental biology in the first decades of the 20th century when conflicting results and interpretations co-existed for a long time until these differences were resolved and contradictions were eliminated. In cancer research, instead of this healthy "weeding-out" process, there have been attempts to reach a premature synthesis, while no hypothesis is being rejected. Systems Biology could help cancer research to overcome this stalemate by resolving contradictions and identifying spurious data. First, in silico experiments should allow cancer researchers to be bold and a priori reject sets of data and hypotheses in order to gain a deeper understanding of how each dataset and each hypothesis contributes to the overall picture. In turn, this process should generate novel hypotheses and rules, which could be explored using these in silico approaches. These activities are significantly less costly and much faster than "wet-experiments". Consequently, Systems Biology could be advantageously used both as a heuristic tool to guide "wet-experiments" and to refine hypotheses and test predictions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
France 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
India 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 31 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 27%
Researcher 10 27%
Other 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Chemistry 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 7 19%

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 18 July 2012.
All research outputs
#2,979,222
of 4,505,992 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cell International
#118
of 226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,503
of 76,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cell International
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,505,992 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 226 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 76,688 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 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.