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 |
Quantifying the utility of single nucleotide polymorphisms to guide colorectal cancer screening
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Future Oncology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2217/fon.15.303 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark A Jenkins, Enes Makalic, James G Dowty, Daniel F Schmidt, Gillian S Dite, Robert J MacInnis, Driss Ait Ouakrim, Mark Clendenning, Louisa B Flander, Oliver K Stanesby, John L Hopper, Aung K Win, Daniel D Buchanan |
| Abstract |
To determine whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) can be used to identify people who should be screened for colorectal cancer. We simulated one million people with and without colorectal cancer based on published SNP allele frequencies and strengths of colorectal cancer association. We estimated 5-year risks of colorectal cancer by number of risk alleles. We identified 45 SNPs with an average 1.14-fold increase colorectal cancer risk per allele (range: 1.05-1.53). The colorectal cancer risk for people in the highest quintile of risk alleles was 1.81-times that for the average person. We have quantified the extent to which known susceptibility SNPs can stratify the population into clinically useful colorectal cancer risk categories. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 03 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,875,904
of 25,610,986 outputs
Outputs from Future Oncology
#106
of 2,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,243
of 407,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Future Oncology
#3
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,610,986 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,328 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 407,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.