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.
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 |
Cancer Karyotypes: Survival of the Fittest
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2013.00148 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joshua M. Nicholson, Daniela Cimini |
| Abstract |
Cancer cells are typically characterized by complex karyotypes including both structural and numerical changes, with aneuploidy being a ubiquitous feature. It is becoming increasingly evident that aneuploidy per se can cause chromosome mis-segregation, which explains the higher rates of chromosome gain/loss observed in aneuploid cancer cells compared to normal diploid cells, a phenotype termed chromosomal instability (CIN). CIN can be caused by various mechanisms and results in extensive karyotypic heterogeneity within a cancer cell population. However, despite such karyotypic heterogeneity, cancer cells also display predominant karyotypic patterns. In this review we discuss the mechanisms of CIN, with particular emphasis on the role of aneuploidy on CIN. Further, we discuss the potential functional role of karyotypic patterns in cancer. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 131 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 28 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 49 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 28 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 May 2014.
All research outputs
#20,294,025
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#9,505
of 22,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,801
of 291,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#140
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,805 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 291,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.