↓ Skip to main content

DRUMS: Disk Repository with Update Management and Select option for high throughput sequencing data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
DRUMS: Disk Repository with Update Management and Select option for high throughput sequencing data
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-15-38
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Nettling, Nils Thieme, Andreas Both, Ivo Grosse

Abstract

New technologies for analyzing biological samples, like next generation sequencing, are producing a growing amount of data together with quality scores. Moreover, software tools (e.g., for mapping sequence reads), calculating transcription factor binding probabilities, estimating epigenetic modification enriched regions or determining single nucleotide polymorphism increase this amount of position-specific DNA-related data even further. Hence, requesting data becomes challenging and expensive and is often implemented using specialised hardware. In addition, picking specific data as fast as possible becomes increasingly important in many fields of science. The general problem of handling big data sets was addressed by developing specialized databases like HBase, HyperTable or Cassandra. However, these database solutions require also specialized or distributed hardware leading to expensive investments. To the best of our knowledge, there is no database capable of (i) storing billions of position-specific DNA-related records, (ii) performing fast and resource saving requests, and (iii) running on a single standard computer hardware.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 6%
Sweden 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 25 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 39%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 35%
Computer Science 9 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 2 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 07 February 2014.
All research outputs
#6,352,090
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,450
of 7,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,073
of 307,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#31
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,267 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. 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 307,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 68% of its contemporaries.