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 |
A filter-flow perspective of haematogenous metastasis offers a non-genetic paradigm for personalised cancer therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Cancer (1965), October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.08.019 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacob G Scott, Alexander G Fletcher, Philip K Maini, Alexander R A Anderson, Philip Gerlee |
| Abstract |
Research into mechanisms of haematogenous metastasis has largely become genetic in focus, attempting to understand the molecular basis of 'seed-soil' relationships. Preceding this biological mechanism is the physical process of dissemination of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in the circulation. Patterns of metastatic spread have been previously quantified using the metastatic efficiency index, a measure quantifying metastatic incidence for a given primary-target organ pair and the relative blood flow between them. We extend this concept to take into account the reduction in CTCs which occurs in organ capillary beds connected by a realistic vascular network topology. Application to a dataset of metastatic incidence reveals that metastatic patterns depend strongly on assumptions about the existence and location of micrometastatic disease which governs CTC dynamics on the network, something which has heretofore not been considered - an oversight which precludes our ability to predict metastatic patterns in individual patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 | 5 | 45% |
| France | 1 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| India | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 6 | 55% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 36% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 29 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 29% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,344,916
of 25,416,581 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Cancer (1965)
#2,248
of 6,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,251
of 267,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Cancer (1965)
#15
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,416,581 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 267,549 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.