| Title |
Application of clinical bioinformatics in lung cancer-specific biomarkers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10555-015-9564-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Duojiao Wu, Xiangdong Wang |
| Abstract |
The fact that lung cancer is a heterogeneous disease suggests that there is a high likelihood that effective lung cancer biomarkers will need to address patient-specific molecular defects, clinical characters, and aspects of the tumor microenvironment. In this transition, clinical bioinformatics tools and resources are the most appropriate means to improve the analysis, as major biological databases are now containing clinical data alongside genomics, proteomics, and other biological data. Clinical bioinformatics comprises a series of concepts and approaches that have been used successfully both to delineate novel biological mechanisms and to drive translational advances in individualized healthcare. In this article, we outline several of emerging clinical bioinformatics-based strategies as they apply specifically to lung cancer. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 19% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 June 2015.
All research outputs
#15,467,628
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#613
of 811 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,578
of 264,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 811 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 264,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 4 of them.