↓ Skip to main content

Breast cancer risk models: a comprehensive overview of existing models, validation, and clinical applications

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Breast cancer risk models: a comprehensive overview of existing models, validation, and clinical applications
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10549-017-4247-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica A. Cintolo-Gonzalez, Danielle Braun, Amanda L. Blackford, Emanuele Mazzola, Ahmet Acar, Jennifer K. Plichta, Molly Griffin, Kevin S. Hughes

Abstract

Numerous models have been developed to quantify the combined effect of various risk factors to predict either risk of developing breast cancer, risk of carrying a high-risk germline genetic mutation, specifically in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, or the risk of both. These breast cancer risk models can be separated into those that utilize mainly hormonal and environmental factors and those that focus more on hereditary risk. Given the wide range of models from which to choose, understanding what each model predicts, the populations for which each is best suited to provide risk estimations, the current validation and comparative studies that have been performed for each model, and how to apply them practically is important for clinicians and researchers seeking to utilize risk models in their practice. This review provides a comprehensive guide for those seeking to understand and apply breast cancer risk models by summarizing the majority of existing breast cancer risk prediction models including the risk factors they incorporate, the basic methodology in their development, the information each provides, their strengths and limitations, relevant validation studies, and how to access each for clinical or investigative purposes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 145 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Student > Master 9 6%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 39 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 11%
Computer Science 10 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 49 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,931,166
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,212
of 4,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,557
of 309,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#55
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 309,748 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 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.