| Title |
Combination of ERK and autophagy inhibition as a treatment approach for pancreatic cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Medicine, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41591-019-0368-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirsten L. Bryant, Clint A. Stalnecker, Daniel Zeitouni, Jennifer E. Klomp, Sen Peng, Andrey P. Tikunov, Venugopal Gunda, Mariaelena Pierobon, Andrew M. Waters, Samuel D. George, Garima Tomar, Björn Papke, G. Aaron Hobbs, Liang Yan, Tikvah K. Hayes, J. Nathaniel Diehl, Gennifer D. Goode, Nina V. Chaika, Yingxue Wang, Guo-Fang Zhang, Agnieszka K. Witkiewicz, Erik S. Knudsen, Emanuel F. Petricoin, Pankaj K. Singh, Jeffrey M. Macdonald, Nhan L. Tran, Costas A. Lyssiotis, Haoqiang Ying, Alec C. Kimmelman, Adrienne D. Cox, Channing J. Der |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 156 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 | 59 | 38% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 3% |
| Canada | 4 | 3% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Norway | 3 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Japan | 2 | 1% |
| China | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 60 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 98 | 63% |
| Scientists | 44 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 452 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 452 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 96 | 21% |
| Researcher | 86 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 38 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 4% |
| Other | 46 | 10% |
| Unknown | 139 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 129 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 45 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 15 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 15 | 3% |
| Other | 45 | 10% |
| Unknown | 166 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 247. 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 15 March 2023.
All research outputs
#153,674
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#677
of 9,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,256
of 368,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#13
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 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 9,412 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 105.8. 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 368,758 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 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.