| Title |
Nutraceutical use in late-stage cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, August 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10555-010-9240-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael J. Wargovich, Jay Morris, Vondina Brown, Jane Ellis, Britt Logothetis, Rebecca Weber |
| Abstract |
Access to a wealth of information on the internet has led many cancer patients to use complementary methods as an adjunct to traditional therapy for cancer, with, and more often, without informing their primary caregiver. Of the common complementary modalities, the use of dietary supplements appears to be highly prevalent in patients in active treatment for cancer, and later in cancer survivors. Emerging research suggests that some plant-based agents may, indeed, impact late-stage cancer, influencing molecular processes corrupted by tumor cells to evade detection, expand clonally, and invade surrounding tissues. The intent of this article is to review some of the current science underpinning the use of nutraceuticals in the latter stages of cancer. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
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 14 August 2017.
All research outputs
#2,799,922
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#54
of 806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,057
of 94,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 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 806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. 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 94,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 73% of its contemporaries.