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 |
A cell-based high-throughput screening assay for radiation susceptibility using automated cell counting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-015-0355-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jasmina Hodzic, Ilse Dingjan, Mariëlle JP Maas, Ida H van der Meulen-Muileman, Renee X de Menezes, Stan Heukelom, Marcel Verheij, Winald R Gerritsen, Albert A Geldof, Baukelien van Triest, Victor W van Beusechem |
| Abstract |
Radiotherapy is one of the mainstays in the treatment for cancer, but its success can be limited due to inherent or acquired resistance. Mechanisms underlying radioresistance in various cancers are poorly understood and available radiosensitizers have shown only modest clinical benefit. There is thus a need to identify new targets and drugs for more effective sensitization of cancer cells to irradiation. Compound and RNA interference high-throughput screening technologies allow comprehensive enterprises to identify new agents and targets for radiosensitization. However, the gold standard assay to investigate radiosensitivity of cancer cells in vitro, the colony formation assay (CFA), is unsuitable for high-throughput screening. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 13% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 March 2015.
All research outputs
#6,788,263
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#329
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,741
of 255,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#15
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 255,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 71% of its contemporaries.