↓ Skip to main content

Longitudinal, genome-scale analysis of DNA methylation in twins from birth to 18 months of age reveals rapid epigenetic change in early life and pair-specific effects of discordance

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2013
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
39 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
161 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Longitudinal, genome-scale analysis of DNA methylation in twins from birth to 18 months of age reveals rapid epigenetic change in early life and pair-specific effects of discordance
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), January 2013
DOI 10.1186/gb-2013-14-5-r42
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Martino, Yuk Loke, Lavinia Gordon, Miina Ollikainen, Mark N Cruickshank, Richard Saffery, Jeffrey M Craig

Abstract

The extent to which development- and age-associated epigenetic changes are influenced by genetic, environmental and stochastic factors remains to be discovered. Twins provide an ideal model with which to investigate these influences but previous cross-sectional twin studies provide contradictory evidence of within-pair epigenetic drift over time. Longitudinal twin studies can potentially address this discrepancy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 3%
United States 4 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 179 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 52 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 21%
Student > Master 25 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 12 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 42 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 13%
Psychology 10 5%
Neuroscience 9 5%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 21 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 12 March 2019.
All research outputs
#930,546
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#728
of 4,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,215
of 281,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#31
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 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 4,125 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 82% 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 281,332 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.