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 |
Resources for Interpreting Variants in Precision Genomic Oncology Applications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2017.00214 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hsinyi Tsang, KanakaDurga Addepalli, Sean R. Davis |
| Abstract |
Precision genomic oncology-applying high throughput sequencing (HTS) at the point-of-care to inform clinical decisions-is a developing precision medicine paradigm that is seeing increasing adoption. Simultaneously, new developments in targeted agents and immunotherapy, when informed by rich genomic characterization, offer potential benefit to a growing subset of patients. Multiple previous studies have commented on methods for identifying both germline and somatic variants. However, interpreting individual variants remains a significant challenge, relying in large part on the integration of observed variants with biological knowledge. A number of data and software resources have been developed to assist in interpreting observed variants, determining their potential clinical actionability, and augmenting them with ancillary information that can inform clinical decisions and even generate new hypotheses for exploration in the laboratory. Here, we review available variant catalogs, variant and functional annotation software and tools, and databases of clinically actionable variants that can be used in an ad hoc approach with research samples or incorporated into a data platform for interpreting and formally reporting clinical results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 | 7 | 39% |
| Norway | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 56% |
| Scientists | 8 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 84 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 10% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,146,474
of 25,804,096 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#817
of 22,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,661
of 326,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#14
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,804,096 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,805 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 326,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.