↓ Skip to main content

Common variants in ACYP2 influence susceptibility to cisplatin-induced hearing loss

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Genetics, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Common variants in ACYP2 influence susceptibility to cisplatin-induced hearing loss
Published in
Nature Genetics, February 2015
DOI 10.1038/ng.3217
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Taking a genome-wide association study approach, we identified inherited genetic variations in ACYP2 associated with cisplatin-related ototoxicity (rs1872328: P = 3.9 × 10(-8), hazard ratio = 4.5) in 238 children with newly diagnosed brain tumors, with independent replication in 68 similarly treated children. The ACYP2 risk variant strongly predisposed these patients to precipitous hearing loss and was related to ototoxicity severity. These results point to new biology underlying the ototoxic effects of platinum agents.

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 25 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 132 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 %
South Africa 2 2%
Singapore 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 127 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Other 9 7%
Other 32 24%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 31 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 30 July 2025.
All research outputs
#920,149
of 32,526,325 outputs
Outputs from Nature Genetics
#1,607
of 8,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,618
of 401,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Genetics
#37
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,526,325 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 401,736 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.