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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Liquid biomarkers in melanoma: detection and discovery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Cancer, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12943-018-0757-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Su Yin Lim, Jenny H. Lee, Russell J. Diefenbach, Richard F. Kefford, Helen Rizos |
| Abstract |
A vast array of tumor-derived genetic, proteomic and cellular components are constantly released into the circulation of cancer patients. These molecules including circulating tumor DNA and RNA, proteins, tumor and immune cells are emerging as convenient and accurate liquid biomarkers of cancer. Circulating cancer biomarkers provide invaluable information on cancer detection and diagnosis, prognosticate patient outcomes, and predict treatment response. In this era of effective molecular targeted treatments and immunotherapies, there is now an urgent need to implement use of these circulating biomarkers in the clinic to facilitate personalized therapy. In this review, we present recent findings in circulating melanoma biomarkers, examine the challenges and promise of evolving technologies used for liquid biomarker discovery, and discuss future directions and perspectives in melanoma biomarker research. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 151 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 12% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 36 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 April 2020.
All research outputs
#2,779,732
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#159
of 1,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,072
of 441,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#9
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 441,888 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.