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.
| Title |
Renal cell carcinoma: links and risks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijnrd.s75916 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Reena Kabaria, Zachary Klaassen, Martha K Terris |
| Abstract |
This review provides an overview of the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and a summary of the most commonly associated risk factors. A literature review was performed with a focus on recent studies with a high level of evidence (large prospective cohort studies and meta-analyses). The incidence rate of RCC varies globally, with the rate rising rapidly in more developed regions, demonstrating the effects of increased use of diagnostic imaging and prevalence of modifiable risk factors. Based on the current evidence, cigarette smoking, obesity, and hypertension are the most well-established risk factors for sporadic RCC worldwide. Acquired cystic kidney disease is also a significant risk factor, specifically in dialysis patients. There is increasing evidence for an inverse association between RCC risk and moderate alcohol consumption. Certain analgesics and occupational exposure have been linked to an increased risk of RCC, although data are limited. Diets rich in fruits and vegetables may provide a protective effect. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 162 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 16% |
| Researcher | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 11% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 12% |
| Unknown | 51 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 12% |
| Unknown | 61 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 26 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,872,700
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease
#12
of 260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,651
of 313,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 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 260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 313,042 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.