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 |
Using Genetic Proxies for Lifecourse Sun Exposure to Assess the Causal Relationship of Sun Exposure with Circulating Vitamin D and Prostate Cancer Risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-12-1248 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carolina Bonilla, Rebecca Gilbert, John P. Kemp, Nicholas J. Timpson, David M. Evans, Jenny L. Donovan, Freddie C. Hamdy, David E. Neal, William D. Fraser, Smith George Davey, Sarah J. Lewis, Mark Lathrop, Richard M. Martin |
| Abstract |
Ecological and epidemiological studies have identified an inverse association of intensity and duration of sunlight exposure with prostate cancer, which may be explained by a reduction in vitamin D synthesis. Pigmentation traits influence sun exposure and therefore may affect prostate cancer risk. Because observational studies are vulnerable to confounding and measurement error, we used Mendelian randomization to examine the relationship of sun exposure with both prostate cancer risk and the intermediate phenotype, plasma levels of vitamin D. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 130 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 20 | 15% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 11% |
| Professor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 29 | 21% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 11 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 29 | 21% |
| Unknown | 37 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,411,265
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#2,839
of 4,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,335
of 212,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#47
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 212,822 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.