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 |
Risks of Primary Extracolonic Cancers Following Colorectal Cancer in Lynch Syndrome
|
---|---|
Published in |
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, August 2012
|
DOI | 10.1093/jnci/djs351 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Aung Ko Win, Noralane M Lindor, Joanne P Young, Finlay A Macrae, Graeme P Young, Elizabeth Williamson, Susan Parry, Jack Goldblatt, Lara Lipton, Ingrid Winship, Barbara Leggett, Katherine M Tucker, Graham G Giles, Daniel D Buchanan, Mark Clendenning, Christophe Rosty, Julie Arnold, A Joan Levine, Robert W Haile, Steven Gallinger, Loïc Le Marchand, Polly A Newcomb, John L Hopper, Mark A Jenkins |
Abstract |
Lynch syndrome is a highly penetrant cancer predisposition syndrome caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. We estimated the risks of primary cancers other than colorectal cancer following a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in mutation carriers. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 17% |
Australia | 1 | 17% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 2 | 1% |
India | 1 | <1% |
Greece | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 136 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 20 | 14% |
Student > Bachelor | 16 | 11% |
Other | 13 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
Other | 39 | 28% |
Unknown | 29 | 21% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 38% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 16% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 9% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
Unspecified | 2 | 1% |
Other | 9 | 6% |
Unknown | 39 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 25 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,524,917
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
#977
of 7,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,224
of 187,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
#8
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 7,845 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 187,801 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 92% of its contemporaries.