↓ Skip to main content

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Noninvasive Follicular Thyroid Neoplasm with Papillary-Like Nuclear Features: Historical Context, Diagnosis, and Future Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Endocrine Pathology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 391)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Noninvasive Follicular Thyroid Neoplasm with Papillary-Like Nuclear Features: Historical Context, Diagnosis, and Future Challenges
Published in
Endocrine Pathology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12022-017-9478-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bin Xu, Giovanni Tallini, Ronald A. Ghossein

Abstract

The encapsulated/well-demarcated non-invasive form of follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma (FVPTC) that occurs annually in 45,000 patients worldwide was thought for 30 years to be a carcinoma. Many studies have now shown almost no recurrence in these non-invasive tumors, even in patients treated by surgery without radioactive iodine therapy. The categorization of the tumor as cancer has led to aggressive forms of treatment, with their side effects, financial costs, and the psychological and social impact of a cancer diagnosis. Recently, the encapsulated/well-demarcated non-invasive, FVPTC was renamed as noninvasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP) by an international group of experts. The new terminology lacks the carcinoma label enabling clinicians to avoid aggressive therapy. By taking the reader through the history of FVPTC, this article explains how diagnostic criteria for thyroid carcinoma of follicular cells have evolved over the last 60 years. It discusses the steps that led to the labeling of FVPTC as cancer and highlights the various studies that helped reclassify and rename this tumor. It also sheds light on the impact of this reclassification on cytologic diagnosis and focuses on the studies needed to refine and expand the histologic criteria of NIFTP. By understanding the history of this change in nomenclature, future classification of tumors will be greatly improved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Other 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Psychology 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 2017.
All research outputs
#2,353,012
of 25,053,336 outputs
Outputs from Endocrine Pathology
#17
of 391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,927
of 314,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Endocrine Pathology
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,053,336 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 314,341 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them