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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
pycoMeth: a toolbox for differential methylation testing from Nanopore methylation calls
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, April 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-023-02917-w |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rene Snajder, Adrien Leger, Oliver Stegle, Marc Jan Bonder |
| Abstract |
We present pycoMeth, a toolbox to store, manage and analyze DNA methylation calls from long-read sequencing data obtained using the Oxford Nanopore Technologies sequencing platform. Building on a novel, rapid-access, read-level and reference-anchored methylation storage format MetH5, we propose efficient algorithms for haplotype aware, multi-sample consensus segmentation and differential methylation testing. We show that MetH5 is more efficient than existing solutions for storing Oxford Nanopore Technologies methylation calls, and carry out benchmarking for pycoMeth segmentation and differential methylation testing, demonstrating increased performance and sensitivity compared to existing solutions designed for short-read methylation data. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 19% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 5% |
| Thailand | 2 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
| Australia | 2 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| India | 1 | 3% |
| China | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 19 | 51% |
| Members of the public | 16 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 20% |
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 40% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 22 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,282,252
of 25,587,485 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,877
of 4,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,687
of 414,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#41
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,587,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,492 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 414,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 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 55% of its contemporaries.