↓ Skip to main content

Connecting (T)issues: How Research in Fascia Biology Can Impact Integrative Oncology

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 tweeters
facebook
16 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Connecting (T)issues: How Research in Fascia Biology Can Impact Integrative Oncology
Published in
Cancer Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1158/0008-5472.can-16-0753
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helene M. Langevin, Patricia Keely, Jun Mao, Lisa M. Hodge, Robert Schleip, Gary Deng, Boris Hinz, Melody A. Swartz, Beverley A. de Valois, Suzanna Zick, Thomas Findley

Abstract

Complementary and integrative treatments, such as massage, acupuncture, and yoga, are used by increasing numbers of cancer patients to manage symptoms and improve their quality of life. In addition, such treatments may have other important and currently overlooked benefits by reducing tissue stiffness and improving mobility. Recent advances in cancer biology are underscoring the importance of connective tissue in the local tumor environment. Inflammation and fibrosis are well-recognized contributors to cancer, and connective tissue stiffness is emerging as a driving factor in tumor growth. Physical-based therapies have been shown to reduce connective tissue inflammation and fibrosis and thus may have direct beneficial effects on cancer spreading and metastasis. Meanwhile, there is currently little knowledge on potential risks of applying mechanical forces in the vicinity of tumors. Thus, both basic and clinical research are needed to understand the full impact of integrative oncology on cancer biology as well as whole person health. Cancer Res; 1-4. ©2016 AACR.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 7 16%
Unspecified 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Researcher 5 12%
Other 4 9%
Other 15 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 28%
Unspecified 10 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 5 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 12 November 2018.
All research outputs
#794,174
of 13,770,158 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Research
#632
of 13,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,463
of 267,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Research
#21
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,770,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 267,093 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 72% of its contemporaries.