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 |
Developing a nanoparticle test for prostate cancer scoring
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1479-5876-10-44 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qun Huo, Sally A Litherland, Shannon Sullivan, Hillari Hallquist, David A Decker, Inoel Rivera-Ramirez |
| Abstract |
Over-diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer has been a major problem in prostate cancer care and management. Currently the most relevant prognostic factor to predict a patient's risk of death due to prostate cancer is the Gleason score of the biopsied tissue samples. However, pathological analysis is subjective, and the Gleason score is only a qualitative estimate of the cancer malignancy. Molecular biomarkers and diagnostic tests that can accurately predict prostate tumor aggressiveness are rather limited. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Lithuania | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 22% |
| Researcher | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 21% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 17% |
| Engineering | 7 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,537,078
of 24,393,999 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#274
of 4,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,293
of 159,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,393,999 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 159,840 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 98% of its contemporaries.