↓ Skip to main content

Identification of Genes Differentially Expressed in Benign versus Malignant Thyroid Tumors

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Cancer Research, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Identification of Genes Differentially Expressed in Benign versus Malignant Thyroid Tumors
Published in
Clinical Cancer Research, June 2008
DOI 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-07-4495
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nijaguna B. Prasad, Helina Somervell, Ralph P. Tufano, Alan P.B. Dackiw, Michael R. Marohn, Joseph A. Califano, Yongchun Wang, William H. Westra, Douglas P. Clark, Christopher B. Umbricht, Steven K. Libutti, Martha A. Zeiger

Abstract

Although fine-needle aspiration biopsy is the most useful diagnostic tool in evaluating a thyroid nodule, preoperative diagnosis of thyroid nodules is frequently imprecise, with up to 30% of fine-needle aspiration biopsy cytology samples reported as "suspicious" or "indeterminate." Therefore, other adjuncts, such as molecular-based diagnostic approaches are needed in the preoperative distinction of these lesions.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
France 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 39 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Other 5 12%
Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Engineering 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 4 9%

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 20 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,601,384
of 22,113,391 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#2,268
of 12,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,017
of 253,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#11
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,113,391 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,414 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 253,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.