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 |
Establishment and Validation of Circulating Tumor Cell–Based Prognostic Nomograms in First-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Cancer Research, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-12-3137 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonio Giordano, Brian L. Egleston, David Hajage, Joseph Bland, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, James M. Reuben, Jean-Yves Pierga, Massimo Cristofanilli, Francois-Clement Bidard |
| Abstract |
Circulating tumor cells (CTC) represent a new outcome-associated biomarker independent from known prognostic factors in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The objective here was to develop and validate nomograms that combined baseline CTC counts and the other prognostic factors to assess the outcome of individual patients starting first-line treatment for MBC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 19% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 42% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 March 2013.
All research outputs
#13,880,538
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#9,659
of 12,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,646
of 196,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#97
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 196,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.