| Title |
Utility of prognostic genomic tests in breast cancer practice: The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Consensus Statement †
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Oncology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1093/annonc/mds645 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H.A. Azim, S. Michiels, F. Zagouri, S. Delaloge, M. Filipits, M. Namer, P. Neven, W.F. Symmans, A. Thompson, F. André, S. Loi, C. Swanton |
| Abstract |
We critically evaluated the available evidence on genomic tests in breast cancer to define their prognostic ability and likelihood to determine treatment benefit. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 14% |
| France | 1 | 14% |
| Chile | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 29 | 22% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 24% |
| Unknown | 18 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 42% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 23 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 December 2018.
All research outputs
#2,745,916
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Oncology
#1,518
of 7,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,157
of 293,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Oncology
#13
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 293,479 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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.