| Title |
Cost-effectiveness of Universal BRCA1/2 Screening: Evidence-Based Decision Making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA Oncology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2340 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elisa F. Long, Patricia A. Ganz |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 130 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 | 44 | 34% |
| Spain | 13 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 3% |
| Australia | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Unknown | 44 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 83 | 64% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 24 | 18% |
| Scientists | 22 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 208. 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 21 November 2018.
All research outputs
#188,641
of 25,463,724 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Oncology
#321
of 3,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,792
of 396,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Oncology
#4
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,463,724 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 3,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 396,045 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 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 96% of its contemporaries.