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 |
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing induces exon skipping by alternative splicing or exon deletion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-017-1237-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haiwei Mou, Jordan L. Smith, Lingtao Peng, Hao Yin, Jill Moore, Xiao-Ou Zhang, Chun-Qing Song, Ankur Sheel, Qiongqiong Wu, Deniz M. Ozata, Yingxiang Li, Daniel G. Anderson, Charles P. Emerson, Erik J. Sontheimer, Melissa J. Moore, Zhiping Weng, Wen Xue |
| Abstract |
CRISPR is widely used to disrupt gene function by inducing small insertions and deletions. Here, we show that some single-guide RNAs (sgRNAs) can induce exon skipping or large genomic deletions that delete exons. For example, CRISPR-mediated editing of β-catenin exon 3, which encodes an autoinhibitory domain, induces partial skipping of the in-frame exon and nuclear accumulation of β-catenin. A single sgRNA can induce small insertions or deletions that partially alter splicing or unexpected larger deletions that remove exons. Exon skipping adds to the unexpected outcomes that must be accounted for, and perhaps taken advantage of, in CRISPR experiments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 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 | 18 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 8% |
| Australia | 5 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Russia | 3 | 3% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Japan | 2 | 2% |
| India | 2 | 2% |
| Finland | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 39 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 52 | 54% |
| Scientists | 40 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 325 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 323 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 82 | 25% |
| Researcher | 50 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 44 | 14% |
| Unknown | 71 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 117 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 70 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 5% |
| Engineering | 8 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 32 | 10% |
| Unknown | 76 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 January 2023.
All research outputs
#562,863
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#322
of 4,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,740
of 332,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#8
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,509 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 332,736 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.