↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations and proposed guidelines for assessing the cumulative evidence on joint effects of genes and environments on cancer occurrence in humans

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Epidemiology, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Recommendations and proposed guidelines for assessing the cumulative evidence on joint effects of genes and environments on cancer occurrence in humans
Published in
International Journal of Epidemiology, May 2012
DOI 10.1093/ije/dys010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo Boffetta, Deborah M Winn, John P Ioannidis, Duncan C Thomas, Julian Little, George Davey Smith, Vincent J Cogliano, Stephen S Hecht, Daniela Seminara, Paolo Vineis, Muin J Khoury

Abstract

We propose guidelines to evaluate the cumulative evidence of gene-environment (G × E) interactions in the causation of human cancer. Our approach has its roots in the HuGENet and IARC Monographs evaluation processes for genetic and environmental risk factors, respectively, and can be applied to common chronic diseases other than cancer. We first review issues of definitions of G × E interactions, discovery and modelling methods for G × E interactions, and issues in systematic reviews of evidence for G × E interactions, since these form the foundation for appraising the credibility of evidence in this contentious field. We then propose guidelines that include four steps: (i) score the strength of the evidence for main effects of the (a) environmental exposure and (b) genetic variant; (ii) establish a prior score category and decide on the pattern of interaction to be expected; (iii) score the strength of the evidence for interaction between the environmental exposure and the genetic variant; and (iv) examine the overall plausibility of interaction by combining the prior score and the strength of the evidence and interpret results. We finally apply the scheme to the interaction between NAT2 polymorphism and tobacco smoking in determining bladder cancer risk.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
United Kingdom 2 2%
France 2 2%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 96 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 18%
Professor 8 8%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 7 7%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 16 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Computer Science 4 4%
Psychology 4 4%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 21 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 30 April 2014.
All research outputs
#5,614,702
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Epidemiology
#2,451
of 5,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,836
of 163,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Epidemiology
#14
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,558 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 163,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 60% of its contemporaries.