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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evaluating the evidence for targeting FOXO3a in breast cancer: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Cell International, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12935-015-0156-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon Taylor, Matthew Lam, Chathyan Pararasa, James EP Brown, Amtul R Carmichael, Helen R Griffiths |
| Abstract |
Tumour cells show greater dependency on glycolysis so providing a sufficient and rapid energy supply for fast growth. In many breast cancers, estrogen, progesterone and epidermal growth factor receptor-positive cells proliferate in response to growth factors and growth factor antagonists are a mainstay of treatment. However, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells lack receptor expression, are frequently more aggressive and are resistant to growth factor inhibition. Downstream of growth factor receptors, signal transduction proceeds via phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3k), Akt and FOXO3a inhibition, the latter being partly responsible for coordinated increases in glycolysis and apoptosis resistance. FOXO3a may be an attractive therapeutic target for TNBC. Therefore we have undertaken a systematic review of FOXO3a as a target for breast cancer therapeutics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Professor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 19% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 17% |
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 08 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,296,808
of 24,037,100 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cell International
#807
of 1,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,166
of 359,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cell International
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,037,100 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,926 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 359,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 65% of its contemporaries.