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 |
Comparing somatic mutation-callers: beyond Venn diagrams
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-14-189 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Su Yeon Kim, Terence P Speed |
| Abstract |
Somatic mutation-calling based on DNA from matched tumor-normal patient samples is one of the key tasks carried by many cancer genome projects. One such large-scale project is The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), which is now routinely compiling catalogs of somatic mutations from hundreds of paired tumor-normal DNA exome-sequence data. Nonetheless, mutation calling is still very challenging. TCGA benchmark studies revealed that even relatively recent mutation callers from major centers showed substantial discrepancies. Evaluation of the mutation callers or understanding the sources of discrepancies is not straightforward, since for most tumor studies, validation data based on independent whole-exome DNA sequencing is not available, only partial validation data for a selected (ascertained) subset of sites. |
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 | 9 | 24% |
| Canada | 4 | 11% |
| France | 3 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 5% |
| Germany | 2 | 5% |
| Malawi | 1 | 3% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 24 | 65% |
| Members of the public | 12 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 16 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 4 | 2% |
| France | 3 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 196 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 89 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 107 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 43 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 25 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 7% |
| Unknown | 22 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 23 August 2014.
All research outputs
#1,608,655
of 24,846,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#276
of 7,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,222
of 202,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#7
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,846,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 202,527 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 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.