↓ Skip to main content

Colorectal and Other Cancer Risks for Carriers and Noncarriers From Families With a DNA Mismatch Repair Gene Mutation: A Prospective Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, February 2012
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
278 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 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
Colorectal and Other Cancer Risks for Carriers and Noncarriers From Families With a DNA Mismatch Repair Gene Mutation: A Prospective Cohort Study
Published in
Journal of Clinical Oncology, February 2012
DOI 10.1200/jco.2011.39.5590
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aung Ko Win, Joanne P. Young, Noralane M. Lindor, Katherine M. Tucker, Dennis J. Ahnen, Graeme P. Young, Daniel D. Buchanan, Mark Clendenning, Graham G. Giles, Ingrid Winship, Finlay A. Macrae, Jack Goldblatt, Melissa C. Southey, Julie Arnold, Stephen N. Thibodeau, Shanaka R. Gunawardena, Bharati Bapat, John A. Baron, Graham Casey, Steven Gallinger, Loïc Le Marchand, Polly A. Newcomb, Robert W. Haile, John L. Hopper, Mark A. Jenkins

Abstract

To determine whether cancer risks for carriers and noncarriers from families with a mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutation are increased above the risks of the general population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 198 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 20%
Researcher 31 15%
Other 22 11%
Student > Bachelor 21 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Other 44 21%
Unknown 28 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 11%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 1%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 33 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 20 February 2012.
All research outputs
#3,202,275
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#7,186
of 22,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,473
of 257,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#63
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,046 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 257,483 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 193 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 67% of its contemporaries.