↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Infrastructure for the life sciences: design and implementation of the UniProt website

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
392 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
235 Mendeley
citeulike
14 CiteULike
connotea
5 Connotea

What is this page?

Summary Twitter Wikipedia Dimensions citations
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.
Title
Infrastructure for the life sciences: design and implementation of the UniProt website
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-10-136
Pubmed ID
19426475
Authors

Eric Jain, Amos Bairoch, Severine Duvaud, Isabelle Phan, Nicole Redaschi, Baris E Suzek, Maria J Martin, Peter McGarvey, Elisabeth Gasteiger

Abstract

The UniProt consortium was formed in 2002 by groups from the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (SIB), the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) and the Protein Information Resource (PIR) at Georgetown University, and soon afterwards the website http://www.uniprot.org was set up as a central entry point to UniProt resources. Requests to this address were redirected to one of the three organisations' websites. While these sites shared a set of static pages with general information about UniProt, their pages for searching and viewing data were different. To provide users with a consistent view and to cut the cost of maintaining three separate sites, the consortium decided to develop a common website for UniProt. Following several years of intense development and a year of public beta testing, the http://www.uniprot.org domain was switched to the newly developed site described in this paper in July 2008.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 9 4%
Germany 7 3%
United States 6 3%
Brazil 4 2%
Spain 3 1%
France 2 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 10 4%
Unknown 190 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 26%
Researcher 56 24%
Student > Master 22 9%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 46 20%
Unknown 17 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 112 48%
Computer Science 28 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 11%
Engineering 11 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 4%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 23 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#5,856,450
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,167
of 7,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,414
of 92,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#12
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 92,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.