↓ Skip to main content

Atypical Presentation: Metastatic Uveal Melanoma in a Young Patient without Visual Complaints

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
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
Atypical Presentation: Metastatic Uveal Melanoma in a Young Patient without Visual Complaints
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Grachinski Buiar, Sérgio Jobim de Azevedo

Abstract

Uveal melanoma is a rare and aggressive subtype of melanoma, with singular characteristics that separate it from the most famous cutaneous melanoma. This uncommon condition becomes even rarer if we look at young population. Common chemotherapy regimens does not work with this aggressive disease in its metastatic scenario, and the new armament like targeted and immunotherapies are still looking for more robust evidence. We report a rare case of uveal melanoma in a patient younger than 20 years, with abdominal pain as his initial complaint. He did not present the typical visual symptoms of the primary site because of an auto accident suffered 4 months before the presentation, letting him blind of the eye affected by the tumor development. There is always a possibility of the diagnosis of uveal melanoma in cases with associated isolated hepatic metastases, even in a young population, where this hypothesis is often rejected by the epidemiological frequency of other tumors. This rare case is a useful example.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 18%
Student > Postgraduate 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 55%
Unspecified 1 9%
Neuroscience 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Unknown 2 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,615,224
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#3,837
of 22,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,154
of 327,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#33
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,440 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 327,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 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 61% of its contemporaries.