↓ Skip to main content

Genetic correlation between multiple myeloma and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia provides evidence for shared aetiology

Overview of attention for article published in Blood Cancer Journal, December 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
49 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
Genetic correlation between multiple myeloma and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia provides evidence for shared aetiology
Published in
Blood Cancer Journal, December 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41408-018-0162-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Molly Went, Amit Sud, Helen Speedy, Nicola J. Sunter, Asta Försti, Philip J. Law, David C. Johnson, Fabio Mirabella, Amy Holroyd, Ni Li, Giulia Orlando, Niels Weinhold, Mark van Duin, Bowang Chen, Jonathan S. Mitchell, Larry Mansouri, Gunnar Juliusson, Karin E Smedby, Sandrine Jayne, Aneela Majid, Claire Dearden, David J. Allsup, James R. Bailey, Guy Pratt, Chris Pepper, Chris Fegan, Richard Rosenquist, Rowan Kuiper, Owen W. Stephens, Uta Bertsch, Peter Broderick, Hermann Einsele, Walter M. Gregory, Jens Hillengass, Per Hoffmann, Graham H. Jackson, Karl-Heinz Jöckel, Jolanta Nickel, Markus M. Nöthen, Miguel Inacio da Silva Filho, Hauke Thomsen, Brian A. Walker, Annemiek Broyl, Faith E. Davies, Markus Hansson, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Martin J. S. Dyer, Martin Kaiser, Pieter Sonneveld, Gareth J. Morgan, Kari Hemminki, Björn Nilsson, Daniel Catovsky, James M. Allan, Richard S. Houlston

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 4%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 19 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 19 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,002,488
of 25,390,692 outputs
Outputs from Blood Cancer Journal
#88
of 1,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,745
of 449,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Blood Cancer Journal
#3
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 449,703 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 95% of its contemporaries.