| Title |
Integrative Clinical Genomics of Advanced Prostate Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cell.2015.06.053 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dan Robinson, Eliezer M. Van Allen, Yi-Mi Wu, Nikolaus Schultz, Robert J. Lonigro, Juan-Miguel Mosquera, Bruce Montgomery, Mary-Ellen Taplin, Colin C. Pritchard, Gerhardt Attard, Himisha Beltran, Wassim Abida, Robert K. Bradley, Jake Vinson, Xuhong Cao, Pankaj Vats, Lakshmi P. Kunju, Maha Hussain, Felix Y. Feng, Scott A. Tomlins, Kathleen A. Cooney, David C. Smith, Christine Brennan, Javed Siddiqui, Rohit Mehra, Yu Chen, Dana E. Rathkopf, Michael J. Morris, Stephen B. Solomon, Jeremy C. Durack, Victor E. Reuter, Anuradha Gopalan, Jianjiong Gao, Massimo Loda, Rosina T. Lis, Michaela Bowden, Stephen P. Balk, Glenn Gaviola, Carrie Sougnez, Manaswi Gupta, Evan Y. Yu, Elahe A. Mostaghel, Heather H. Cheng, Hyojeong Mulcahy, Lawrence D. True, Stephen R. Plymate, Heidi Dvinge, Roberta Ferraldeschi, Penny Flohr, Susana Miranda, Zafeiris Zafeiriou, Nina Tunariu, Joaquin Mateo, Raquel Perez-Lopez, Francesca Demichelis, Brian D. Robinson, Andrea Sboner, Marc Schiffman, David M. Nanus, Scott T. Tagawa, Alexandros Sigaras, Kenneth W. Eng, Olivier Elemento, Andrea Sboner, Elisabeth I. Heath, Howard I. Scher, Kenneth J. Pienta, Philip Kantoff, Johann S. de Bono, Mark A. Rubin, Peter S. Nelson, Levi A. Garraway, Charles L. Sawyers, Arul M. Chinnaiyan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 137 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 | 30 | 22% |
| Australia | 13 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 8% |
| France | 5 | 4% |
| Germany | 4 | 3% |
| Belgium | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 51 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 75 | 55% |
| Scientists | 60 | 44% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 144 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 16% |
| Researcher | 17 | 12% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 48 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 28 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 54 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 181. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#224,515
of 25,658,139 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#1,233
of 17,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,227
of 276,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#11
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,139 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 17,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 276,780 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 171 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 93% of its contemporaries.