↓ Skip to main content

RAId_DbS: Peptide Identification using Database Searches with Realistic Statistics

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, October 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
RAId_DbS: Peptide Identification using Database Searches with Realistic Statistics
Published in
Biology Direct, October 2007
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-2-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gelio Alves, Aleksey Y Ogurtsov, Yi-Kuo Yu

Abstract

The key to mass-spectrometry-based proteomics is peptide identification. A major challenge in peptide identification is to obtain realistic E-values when assigning statistical significance to candidate peptides. Using a simple scoring scheme, we propose a database search method with theoretically characterized statistics. Taking into account possible skewness in the random variable distribution and the effect of finite sampling, we provide a theoretical derivation for the tail of the score distribution. For every experimental spectrum examined, we collect the scores of peptides in the database, and find good agreement between the collected score statistics and our theoretical distribution. Using Student's t-tests, we quantify the degree of agreement between the theoretical distribution and the score statistics collected. The T-tests may be used to measure the reliability of reported statistics. When combined with reported P-value for a peptide hit using a score distribution model, this new measure prevents exaggerated statistics. Another feature of RAId_DbS is its capability of detecting multiple co-eluted peptides. The peptide identification performance and statistical accuracy of RAId_DbS are assessed and compared with several other search tools. The executables and data related to RAId_DbS are freely available upon request.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 34%
Computer Science 4 13%
Chemistry 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 October 2020.
All research outputs
#7,439,080
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#263
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,635
of 76,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 76,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.