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 |
Societal cost-effectiveness analysis of the 21-gene assay in estrogen-receptor–positive, lymph-node–negative early-stage breast cancer in Japan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-372 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hideko Yamauchi, Chizuko Nakagawa, Shinji Yamashige, Hiroyuki Takei, Hiroshi Yagata, Atsushi Yoshida, Naoki Hayashi, John Hornberger, Tiffany Yu, Calvin Chao, Carl Yoshizawa, Seigo Nakamura |
| Abstract |
Breast-cancer incidence and mortality have been increasing in Japan. Japanese-specific clinical validity and utility data for the 21-gene assay (Oncotype DX® Breast Cancer Assay; Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, USA) are now available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay for the guidance of adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in estrogen-receptor-positive, lymph-node-negative, early-stage breast cancer patients, from the Japanese societal perspective. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 33% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 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 20 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,379,018
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,455
of 7,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,857
of 238,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#100
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 238,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.