↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel

Overview of attention for article published in Blood, November 2016
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
4502 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2713 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel
Published in
Blood, November 2016
DOI 10.1182/blood-2016-08-733196
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hartmut Döhner, Elihu Estey, David Grimwade, Sergio Amadori, Frederick R Appelbaum, Thomas Büchner, Hervé Dombret, Benjamin L Ebert, Pierre Fenaux, Richard A Larson, Ross L Levine, Francesco Lo-Coco, Tomoki Naoe, Dietger Niederwieser, Gert J Ossenkoppele, Miguel Sanz, Jorge Sierra, Martin S Tallman, Hwei-Fang Tien, Andrew H Wei, Bob Löwenberg, Clara D Bloomfield

Abstract

The first edition of the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations for diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults published in 2010 has found broad acceptance by physicians and investigators caring for patients with AML. Recent advances, for example, in the discovery of the genomic landscape of the disease, in the development of assays for genetic testing and for detecting minimal residual disease, as well as in the development of novel anti-leukemic agents, prompted an international panel to provide updated evidence- and expert opinion-based recommendations. The recommendations include a revised version of the ELN genetic categories, a proposal for a response category based on minimal residual disease status, and criteria for progressive disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 87 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,713 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 2708 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 339 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 285 11%
Student > Bachelor 262 10%
Student > Master 241 9%
Other 238 9%
Other 506 19%
Unknown 842 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 853 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 475 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 149 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 89 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 69 3%
Other 172 6%
Unknown 906 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 184. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#217,013
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Blood
#108
of 33,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,413
of 417,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Blood
#9
of 783 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 417,104 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 783 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 98% of its contemporaries.