↓ Skip to main content

Consistency and reproducibility of next‐generation sequencing in cytopathology: A second worldwide ring trial study on improved cytological molecular reference specimens

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Cytopathology, April 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
45 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Consistency and reproducibility of next‐generation sequencing in cytopathology: A second worldwide ring trial study on improved cytological molecular reference specimens
Published in
Cancer Cytopathology, April 2019
DOI 10.1002/cncy.22134
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pasquale Pisapia, Umberto Malapelle, Gianluca Roma, Sonika Saddar, Qi Zheng, Francesco Pepe, Dario Bruzzese, Elena Vigliar, Claudio Bellevicine, Rajyalakshmi Luthra, Yuri E. Nikiforov, Clara Mayo‐de‐Las‐Casas, Miguel Angel Molina‐Vila, Rafael Rosell, Michel Bihl, Spasenija Savic, Lukas Bubendorf, Dario de Biase, Giovanni Tallini, David H. Hwang, Lynette M. Sholl, Sara Vander Borght, Birgit Weynand, Daniel Stieber, Philippe Vielh, Alessandra Rappa, Massimo Barberis, Matteo Fassan, Massimo Rugge, Carlos E. De Andrea, Maria D. Lozano, Cristiana Lupi, Gabriella Fontanini, Fernando Schmitt, Catherine I. Dumur, Bettina Bisig, Massimo Bongiovanni, Sabine Merkelbach‐Bruse, Reinhard Büttner, Marina N. Nikiforova, Sinchita Roy‐Chowdhuri, Giancarlo Troncone, the Molecular Cytopathology Meeting Group

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 7 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,455,235
of 24,172,513 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cytopathology
#91
of 1,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,280
of 354,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cytopathology
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,172,513 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. 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 354,614 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 97% of its contemporaries.