↓ Skip to main content

Family-specific, novel, deleterious germline variants provide a rich resource to identify genetic predispositions for BRCAx familial breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Family-specific, novel, deleterious germline variants provide a rich resource to identify genetic predispositions for BRCAx familial breast cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-14-470
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongxiu Wen, Yeong C Kim, Carrie Snyder, Fengxia Xiao, Elizabeth A Fleissner, Dina Becirovic, Jiangtao Luo, Bradley Downs, Simon Sherman, Kenneth H Cowan, Henry T Lynch, San Ming Wang

Abstract

Genetic predisposition is the primary risk factor for familial breast cancer. For the majority of familial breast cancer, however, the genetic predispositions remain unknown. All newly identified predispositions occur rarely in disease population, and the unknown genetic predispositions are estimated to reach up to total thousands. Family unit is the basic structure of genetics. Because it is an autosomal dominant disease, individuals with a history of familial breast cancer must carry the same genetic predisposition across generations. Therefore, focusing on the cases in lineages of familial breast cancer, rather than pooled cases in disease population, is expected to provide high probability to identify the genetic predisposition for each family.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Computer Science 1 3%
Chemistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,303,385
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,106
of 8,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,533
of 227,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#67
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 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 8,277 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 227,898 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.