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 |
Comparison of next-generation sequencing samples using compression-based distances and its application to phylogenetic reconstruction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-7-320 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ngoc Hieu Tran, Xin Chen |
| Abstract |
Enormous volumes of short read data from next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have posed new challenges to the area of genomic sequence comparison. The multiple sequence alignment approach is hardly applicable to NGS data due to the challenging problem of short read assembly. Thus alignment-free methods are needed for the comparison of NGS samples of short reads. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 3 | 18% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Sweden | 1 | 6% |
| Germany | 1 | 6% |
| Poland | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| China | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Norway | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 10 | 59% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 41% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 64% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 9% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 June 2014.
All research outputs
#4,146,271
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#600
of 4,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,050
of 228,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#21
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 228,116 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 82% 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 done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.