↓ Skip to main content

CDC Grand Rounds: Family History and Genomics as Tools for Cancer Prevention and Control.

Overview of attention for article published in MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 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 (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
43 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
CDC Grand Rounds: Family History and Genomics as Tools for Cancer Prevention and Control.
Published in
MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, November 2016
DOI 10.15585/mmwr.mm6546a3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan L Rodriguez, Cheryll C Thomas, Greta M Massetti, Debra Duquette, Lindsay Avner, John Iskander, Muin J Khoury, Lisa C Richardson

Abstract

Although many efforts in cancer prevention and control have routinely focused on behavioral risk factors, such as tobacco use, or on the early detection of cancer, such as colorectal cancer screening, advances in genetic testing have created new opportunities for cancer prevention through evaluation of family history and identification of cancer-causing inherited mutations. Through the collection and evaluation of a family cancer history by a trained health care provider, patients and families at increased risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome can be identified, referred for genetic counseling and testing, and make informed decisions about options for cancer risk reduction (1). Although hereditary cancers make up a small proportion of all cancers, the number of affected persons can be large, and the level of risk among affected persons is high. Two hereditary cancer syndromes for which public health professionals have worked to reduce the burden of morbidity and mortality are hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 17 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 19 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,096,207
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report
#1,859
of 4,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,942
of 416,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report
#56
of 119 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 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 336.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 416,173 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.