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 |
hMSH6: a potential diagnostic marker for oral carcinoma in situ
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Pathology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1136/jclinpath-2014-202411 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maryam Jessri, Andrew J Dalley, Camile S Farah |
| Abstract |
Oral medicine specialists rely upon accurate assessment of pathology to rationalise lesion management, especially for high-risk oral epithelial dysplasia, carcinoma in situ (CIS) and oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cross-discipline cancer research has highlighted the role of genetic instability in neoplasia. Improved diagnostic stringency from translation of immunostaining for DNA repair defects into current pathology practice has potential to benefit pathologists, clinicians and patients. The focus of this study was the obligatory and non-obligatory components of the MutLα and MutSα mismatch repair heterodimers, namely hMLH1, hMSH2, hPMS2 and hMSH6, which were studied in 274 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections. A readily apparent inverse correlation between oral disease severity and both obligatory and non-obligatory components of MutLα and MutSα was observed (hMLH1, ρ=-0.715; hPMS2, ρ=-0.692; hMSH2, ρ=-0.728; and hMSH6, ρ=-0.702), with particularly conspicuous loss of hMSH6 expression from the stratum basale of CIS. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 33% |
| Brazil | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 43% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 38% |
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 22 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,207,134
of 22,775,504 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Pathology
#2,761
of 3,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,001
of 260,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Pathology
#33
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,775,504 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,925 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 260,389 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.