↓ Skip to main content

Hereditary breast cancer: ever more pieces to the polygenic puzzle

Overview of attention for article published in Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#41 of 117)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Hereditary breast cancer: ever more pieces to the polygenic puzzle
Published in
Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1897-4287-11-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia Bogdanova, Sonja Helbig, Thilo Dörk

Abstract

Several susceptibility genes differentially impact on the lifetime risk for breast cancer. Technological advances over the past years have enabled the detection of genetic risk factors through high-throughput screening of large breast cancer case-control series. High- to intermediate penetrance alleles have now been identified in more than 20 genes involved in DNA damage signalling and repair, and more than 70 low-penetrance loci have been discovered through recent genome-wide association studies. In addition to classical germ-line mutation and single-nucleotide polymorphism, copy number variation and somatic mosaicism have been proposed as potential predisposing mechanisms. Many of the identified loci also appear to influence breast tumour characteristics such as estrogen receptor status. In this review, we briefly summarize present knowledge about breast cancer susceptibility genes and discuss their implications for risk prediction and clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 75 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 19%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 15%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 14 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,101,274
of 8,787,207 outputs
Outputs from Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice
#41
of 117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,423
of 135,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,787,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 117 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 135,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.