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 |
Conversion of KEGG metabolic pathways to SBGN maps including automatic layout
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-14-250 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tobias Czauderna, Michael Wybrow, Kim Marriott, Falk Schreiber |
| Abstract |
Biologists make frequent use of databases containing large and complex biological networks. One popular database is the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) which uses its own graphical representation and manual layout for pathways. While some general drawing conventions exist for biological networks, arbitrary graphical representations are very common. Recently, a new standard has been established for displaying biological processes, the Systems Biology Graphical Notation (SBGN), which aims to unify the look of such maps. Ideally, online repositories such as KEGG would automatically provide networks in a variety of notations including SBGN. Unfortunately, this is non-trivial, since converting between notations may add, remove or otherwise alter map elements so that the existing layout cannot be simply reused. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 2 | 33% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Japan | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 36% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 34% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 March 2014.
All research outputs
#7,418,252
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,916
of 7,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,044
of 176,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#30
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,387 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 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 176,804 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 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 57% of its contemporaries.