↓ Skip to main content

The importance of a large sample cohort for studies on modifier genes influencing disease severity in FAP patients

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
The importance of a large sample cohort for studies on modifier genes influencing disease severity in FAP patients
Published in
Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/1897-4287-11-20
Pubmed ID
Authors

Talseth-Palmer BA, Wijnen JT, Andreassen EK, Barker D, Jagmohan-Changur S, Tops CM, Meldrum C, Spigelman A, Hes FJ, Van Wezel T, Vasen HF, Scott RJ, Bente A Talseth-Palmer, Juul T Wijnen, Eva K Andreassen, Daniel Barker, Shantie Jagmohan-Changur, Carli M Tops, Cliff Meldrum, Allan Spigelman, Frederik J Hes, Tom Van Wezel, Hans FA Vasen, Rodney J Scott

Abstract

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is usually characterised by the appearance of hundreds-to-thousands of adenomas throughout the colon and rectum and if left untreated the condition will develop into CRC with close to 100% penetrance. Germline mutations in the APC gene, which plays an integral role in the Wnt-signalling pathway, have been found to be responsible for 70-90% of FAP cases. Several studies suggest that modifier genes may play an important role in the development of CRC and possible modifiers for FAP have been suggested. Interestingly, a study has found that SNPs within ATP5A1 is associated with raised levels of ATP5A1 expression and high expression levels may facilitate CRC development. We aimed to determine if SNPs in ATP5A1 modify the risk of developing CRC/adenomas in FAP patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 7%
Unknown 13 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 21%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 January 2014.
All research outputs
#3,112,968
of 4,505,915 outputs
Outputs from Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice
#61
of 80 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,611
of 122,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,505,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 80 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 122,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.