The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Circulating tumor cells and circulating tumor DNA for precision medicine: dream or reality?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Oncology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1093/annonc/mdu480 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M Ignatiadis, S-J Dawson |
| Abstract |
Next-generation sequencing studies have provided further evidence to support the notion that cancer is a disease characterized by Darwinian evolution. Today, we often fail to capture this evolution and treatment decisions, even in the metastatic setting, are often based on analysis of primary tumor diagnosed years ago. Currently, this is considered a major reason for treatment failures in cancer care. Recent technological advances in the detection and characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) might address this and allow for treatment tailoring based on real-time monitoring of tumor evolution. In this review, we summarize the most important recent findings in the field, focusing on challenges and opportunities in moving these tools forward in clinical practice. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 26% |
| Spain | 2 | 11% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 47% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 32% |
| Scientists | 4 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 270 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Romania | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 257 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 57 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 10% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 9% |
| Other | 50 | 19% |
| Unknown | 45 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 52 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 50 | 19% |
| Engineering | 10 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 17 | 6% |
| Unknown | 58 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 03 July 2024.
All research outputs
#2,009,488
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Oncology
#1,024
of 7,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,963
of 273,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Oncology
#16
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,966 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 273,956 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.