↓ Skip to main content

Population Differences in Breast Cancer: Survey in Indigenous African Women Reveals Over-Representation of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, August 2009
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
258 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Population Differences in Breast Cancer: Survey in Indigenous African Women Reveals Over-Representation of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Published in
Journal of Clinical Oncology, August 2009
DOI 10.1200/jco.2008.19.6873
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Compared with white women, black women experience a disproportionate burden of aggressive breast cancer for reasons that remain unknown and understudied. In the first study of its kind, we determined the distribution of molecular subtypes of invasive breast tumors in indigenous black women in West Africa.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 258 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Nigeria 2 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 255 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 17%
Researcher 33 13%
Student > Master 26 10%
Student > Postgraduate 25 10%
Student > Bachelor 21 8%
Other 50 19%
Unknown 58 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Other 24 9%
Unknown 63 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 02 March 2020.
All research outputs
#1,823,331
of 34,359,530 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#5,109
of 32,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,262
of 149,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Oncology
#21
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,359,530 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 149,543 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 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 90% of its contemporaries.