↓ Skip to main content

Molecular cytogenetic characterization of canine histiocytic sarcoma: A spontaneous model for human histiocytic cancer identifies deletion of tumor suppressor genes and highlights influence of…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Molecular cytogenetic characterization of canine histiocytic sarcoma: A spontaneous model for human histiocytic cancer identifies deletion of tumor suppressor genes and highlights influence of genetic background on tumor behavior
Published in
BMC Cancer, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-11-201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benoit Hedan, Rachael Thomas, Alison Motsinger-Reif, Jerome Abadie, Catherine Andre, John Cullen, Matthew Breen

Abstract

Histiocytic malignancies in both humans and dogs are rare and poorly understood. While canine histiocytic sarcoma (HS) is uncommon in the general domestic dog population, there is a strikingly high incidence in a subset of breeds, suggesting heritable predisposition. Molecular cytogenetic profiling of canine HS in these breeds would serve to reveal recurrent DNA copy number aberrations (CNAs) that are breed and/or tumor associated, as well as defining those shared with human HS. This process would identify evolutionarily conserved cytogenetic changes to highlight regions of particular importance to HS biology.

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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 94 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Other 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 30 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 20 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,895,760
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#622
of 8,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,204
of 112,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#8
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,247 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 112,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.