| Title |
Of Mice and Women: Light as a Circadian Stimulus in Breast Cancer Research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Causes & Control, May 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10552-005-0574-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John D. Bullough, Mark S. Rea, Mariana G. Figueiro |
| Abstract |
Nocturnal rodents are frequently used as models in human breast cancer research, but these species have very different visual and circadian systems and, therefore, very different responses to optical radiation or, informally, light. Because of the impact of light on the circadian system and because recent evidence suggests that cancer risk might be related to circadian disruption, it is becoming increasingly clear that optical radiation must be properly characterized for both nocturnal rodents and diurnal humans to make significant progress in unraveling links between circadian disruption and breast cancer. In this paper, we propose a quantitative framework for comparing radiometric and photometric quantities in human and rodent studies. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 1% |
| Poland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 21% |
| Unknown | 16 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 13% |
| Engineering | 11 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,358,597
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#254
of 2,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,457
of 67,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#5
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 67,584 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.