RETRACTED: Potential biomarker for breast cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Future Generation Computer Systems, ISSN: 0167-739X, Vol: 91, Page: 518-526
2019
- 3Citations
- 19Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal ( http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy ). This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editor has concluded that the acceptance of this article was partly based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was registered in the journal’s reviewer database as a valid profile. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editor has concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. There is no indication that the authors had any involvement with or knowledge of the reviewers. Apologies are offered to the authors and readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. This retraction is not rebutting the integrity of the conducted research and therefore authors are offered the option to resubmit their paper to the journal for a legitimate peer-review.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167739X18318351; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.09.030; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85054056902&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167739X18318351; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.09.030
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know