↓ Skip to main content

RGmatch: matching genomic regions to proximal genes in omics data integration

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
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
RGmatch: matching genomic regions to proximal genes in omics data integration
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1293-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Furió-Tarí, Ana Conesa, Sonia Tarazona

Abstract

The integrative analysis of multiple genomics data often requires that genome coordinates-based signals have to be associated with proximal genes. The relative location of a genomic region with respect to the gene (gene area) is important for functional data interpretation; hence algorithms that match regions to genes should be able to deliver insight into this information. In this work we review the tools that are publicly available for making region-to-gene associations. We also present a novel method, RGmatch, a flexible and easy-to-use Python tool that computes associations either at the gene, transcript, or exon level, applying a set of rules to annotate each region-gene association with the region location within the gene. RGmatch can be applied to any organism as long as genome annotation is available. Furthermore, we qualitatively and quantitatively compare RGmatch to other tools. RGmatch simplifies the association of a genomic region with its closest gene. At the same time, it is a powerful tool because the rules used to annotate these associations are very easy to modify according to the researcher's specific interests. Some important differences between RGmatch and other similar tools already in existence are RGmatch's flexibility, its wide range of user options, compatibility with any annotatable organism, and its comprehensive and user-friendly output.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bulgaria 1 3%
Sweden 1 3%
Unknown 30 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 28%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 April 2017.
All research outputs
#12,779,561
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#3,638
of 7,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,259
of 415,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#47
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,305 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 415,136 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 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 58% of its contemporaries.