↓ Skip to main content

Systems Biology, Systems Medicine, Systems Pharmacology: The What and The Why

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Biotheoretica, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Systems Biology, Systems Medicine, Systems Pharmacology: The What and The Why
Published in
Acta Biotheoretica, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10441-018-9330-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angélique Stéphanou, Eric Fanchon, Pasquale F. Innominato, Annabelle Ballesta

Abstract

Systems biology is today such a widespread discipline that it becomes difficult to propose a clear definition of what it really is. For some, it remains restricted to the genomic field. For many, it designates the integrated approach or the corpus of computational methods employed to handle the vast amount of biological or medical data and investigate the complexity of the living. Although defining systems biology might be difficult, on the other hand its purpose is clear: systems biology, with its emerging subfields systems medicine and systems pharmacology, clearly aims at making sense of complex observations/experimental and clinical datasets to improve our understanding of diseases and their treatments without putting aside the context in which they appear and develop. In this short review, we aim to specifically focus on these new subfields with the new theoretical tools and approaches that were developed in the context of cancer. Systems pharmacology and medicine now give hope for major improvements in cancer therapy, making personalized medicine closer to reality. As we will see, the current challenge is to be able to improve the clinical practice according to the paradigm shift of systems sciences.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 23%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 24 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Computer Science 3 4%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 28 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Acta Biotheoretica
#112
of 213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,128
of 341,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Biotheoretica
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 341,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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