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 |
Experimental characterization of the human non-sequence-specific nucleic acid interactome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2013-14-7-r81 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gerhard Dürnberger, Tilmann Bürckstümmer, Kilian Huber, Roberto Giambruno, Tobias Doerks, Evren Karayel, Thomas R Burkard, Ines Kaupe, André C Müller, Andreas Schönegger, Gerhard F Ecker, Hans Lohninger, Peer Bork, Keiryn L Bennett, Giulio Superti-Furga, Jacques Colinge |
| Abstract |
The interactions between proteins and nucleic acids have a fundamental function in many biological processes, including gene transcription, RNA homeostasis, protein translation and pathogen sensing for innate immunity. While our knowledge of the ensemble of proteins that bind individual mRNAs in mammalian cells has been greatly augmented by recent surveys, no systematic study on the non-sequence-specific engagement of native human proteins with various types of nucleic acids has been reported. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 Kingdom | 3 | 27% |
| Spain | 1 | 9% |
| Germany | 1 | 9% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 9% |
| France | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
| Scientists | 4 | 36% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 10% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 19 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,828,970
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,517
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,435
of 209,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#18
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 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 66% 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 209,804 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 71% of its contemporaries.