↓ Skip to main content

A statistical approach for identifying differential distributions in single-cell RNA-seq experiments

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
42 X users
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
384 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
A statistical approach for identifying differential distributions in single-cell RNA-seq experiments
Published in
Genome Biology, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13059-016-1077-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keegan D. Korthauer, Li-Fang Chu, Michael A. Newton, Yuan Li, James Thomson, Ron Stewart, Christina Kendziorski

Abstract

The ability to quantify cellular heterogeneity is a major advantage of single-cell technologies. However, statistical methods often treat cellular heterogeneity as a nuisance. We present a novel method to characterize differences in expression in the presence of distinct expression states within and among biological conditions. We demonstrate that this framework can detect differential expression patterns under a wide range of settings. Compared to existing approaches, this method has higher power to detect subtle differences in gene expression distributions that are more complex than a mean shift, and can characterize those differences. The freely available R package scDD implements the approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 384 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 374 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 108 28%
Researcher 66 17%
Student > Master 37 10%
Student > Bachelor 33 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 4%
Other 57 15%
Unknown 68 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 102 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 91 24%
Computer Science 26 7%
Mathematics 21 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 5%
Other 46 12%
Unknown 77 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,119,638
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#827
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,742
of 320,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#22
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 320,772 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 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 67% of its contemporaries.