↓ Skip to main content

Prior Autoimmune Disease and Risk of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance and Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
79 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.
Article details
Title
Prior Autoimmune Disease and Risk of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance and Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review
Published in
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, February 2014
DOI 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-0695
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Several observational studies have investigated autoimmune disease and subsequent risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and multiple myeloma. Findings have been largely inconsistent and hindered by the rarity and heterogeneity of the autoimmune disorders investigated. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to evaluate the strength of the evidence linking prior autoimmune disease and risk of MGUS/multiple myeloma.

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 3 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 79 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 %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Other 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 22 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 28 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 January 2017.
All research outputs
#10,329,559
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#2,506
of 5,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,644
of 374,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
#28
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 374,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.