Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality. Dysbiosis in the gut microbiota may be associated with CRC. This systematic review focuses on differences in gut microbial community between people diagnosed with CRC or adenoma and healthy individuals using fecal samples, emphasizing non-invasive fecal microbiome models for CRC early diagnosis. Nineteen studies were identified in a systematic literature search of Pubmed, Web of Science and ScienceDirect. Several bacteria were reported to differ in abundance between CRC and adenoma cases and healthy controls, with Fusobacterium the most common. Fecal multi-bacterial predictive models used to distinguish CRC patients from healthy controls had reported areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs) in external validation populations of 0.68-0.77. Though advanced sequencing techniques could in the future complement current non-invasive methods for CRC early detection, more studies with high statistical power, comparable and reproducible methods and external validation of predictive models are needed.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,191,715
of 28,815,917 outputs
Outputs from Gut Microbes
#537
of 1,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,213
of 358,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gut Microbes
#12
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,815,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 358,037 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
