↓ Skip to main content

Understanding rare and common diseases in the context of human evolution

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), November 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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
126 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
275 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Understanding rare and common diseases in the context of human evolution
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13059-016-1093-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lluis Quintana-Murci

Abstract

The wealth of available genetic information is allowing the reconstruction of human demographic and adaptive history. Demography and purifying selection affect the purge of rare, deleterious mutations from the human population, whereas positive and balancing selection can increase the frequency of advantageous variants, improving survival and reproduction in specific environmental conditions. In this review, I discuss how theoretical and empirical population genetics studies, using both modern and ancient DNA data, are a powerful tool for obtaining new insight into the genetic basis of severe disorders and complex disease phenotypes, rare and common, focusing particularly on infectious disease risk.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 126 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 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Unknown 261 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 27%
Researcher 47 17%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Master 27 10%
Other 12 4%
Other 45 16%
Unknown 38 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 93 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 75 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 10%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 2%
Other 27 10%
Unknown 39 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. 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 28 May 2020.
All research outputs
#462,876
of 21,307,480 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#338
of 4,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,512
of 314,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#35
of 261 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,307,480 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 314,948 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 261 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.