↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

The genetic heterogeneity and mutational burden of engineered melanomas in zebrafish models

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2013
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 (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike

What is this page?

Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
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
The genetic heterogeneity and mutational burden of engineered melanomas in zebrafish models
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2013
DOI 10.1186/gb-2013-14-10-r113
Pubmed ID
24148783
Authors

Jennifer Yen, Richard M White, David C Wedge, Peter Van Loo, Jeroen de Ridder, Amy Capper, Jennifer Richardson, David Jones, Keiran Raine, Ian R Watson, Chang-Jiun Wu, Jiqiu Cheng, Iñigo Martincorena, Serena Nik-Zainal, Laura Mudie, Yves Moreau, John Marshall, Manasa Ramakrishna, Patrick Tarpey, Adam Shlien, Ian Whitmore, Steve Gamble, Calli Latimer, Erin Langdon, Charles Kaufman, Mike Dovey, Alison Taylor, Andy Menzies, Stuart McLaren, Sarah O’Meara, Adam Butler, Jon Teague, James Lister, Lynda Chin, Peter Campbell, David J Adams, Leonard I Zon, E Patton, Derek L Stemple, P Futreal

Abstract

Melanoma is the most deadly form of skin cancer. Expression of oncogenic BRAF or NRAS, which are frequently mutated in human melanomas, promote the formation of nevi but are not sufficient for tumorigenesis. Even with germline mutated p53, these engineered melanomas present with variable onset and pathology, implicating additional somatic mutations in a multi-hit tumorigenic process.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 103 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 10 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 10%
Mathematics 4 4%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 13 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 14 November 2013.
All research outputs
#4,307,189
of 21,677,744 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#2,538
of 3,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,296
of 207,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,677,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 207,936 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them

This page is provided by Altmetric.