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 |
Sensitive Detection of Minimal Residual Disease in Patients Treated for Early-Stage Breast Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Cancer Research, June 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-3005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather A. Parsons, Justin Rhoades, Sarah C. Reed, Gregory Gydush, Priyanka Ram, Pedro Exman, Kan Xiong, Christopher C. Lo, Tianyu Li, Mark Fleharty, Gregory J. Kirkner, Denisse Rotem, Ofir Cohen, Fangyan Yu, Mariana Fitarelli-Kiehl, Ka Wai Leong, Melissa E. Hughes, Shoshana M. Rosenberg, Laura C. Collins, Kathy D. Miller, Brendan Blumenstiel, Lorenzo Trippa, Carrie Cibulskis, Donna S. Neuberg, Matthew DeFelice, Samuel S. Freeman, Niall J. Lennon, Nikhil Wagle, Gavin Ha, Daniel G. Stover, Atish D. Choudhury, Gad Getz, Eric P. Winer, Matthew Meyerson, Nancy U. Lin, Ian Krop, J. Christopher Love, G. Mike Makrigiorgos, Ann H. Partridge, Erica L. Mayer, Todd R. Golub, Viktor A. Adalsteinsson |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 | 11 | 34% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Papua New Guinea | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 44% |
| Scientists | 13 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 109 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 42 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 49 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. 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 December 2022.
All research outputs
#667,271
of 24,969,131 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#408
of 13,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,708
of 403,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#15
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,969,131 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,152 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 403,330 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 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 93% of its contemporaries.