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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
MOABS: model based analysis of bisulfite sequencing data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2014-15-2-r38 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Deqiang Sun, Yuanxin Xi, Benjamin Rodriguez, Hyun Park, Pan Tong, Mira Meong, Margaret A Goodell, Wei Li |
| Abstract |
Bisulfite sequencing (BS-seq) is the gold standard for studying genome-wide DNA methylation. We developed MOABS to increase the speed, accuracy, statistical power and biological relevance of BS-seq data analysis. MOABS detects differential methylation with 10-fold coverage at single-CpG resolution based on a Beta-Binomial hierarchical model and is capable of processing two billion reads in 24 CPU hours. Here, using simulated and real BS-seq data, we demonstrate that MOABS outperforms other leading algorithms, such as Fisher's exact test and BSmooth. Furthermore, MOABS analysis can be easily extended to differential 5hmC analysis using RRBS and oxBS-seq. MOABS is available at http://code.google.com/p/moabs/. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters 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 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| India | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
| Scientists | 5 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 3% |
| Germany | 3 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 247 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 74 | 28% |
| Researcher | 60 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 17 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 45 | 17% |
| Unknown | 30 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 116 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 43 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 20 | 8% |
| Mathematics | 11 | 4% |
| Engineering | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 41 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
#1,953,704
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,700
of 4,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,894
of 313,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#64
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 313,391 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 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 53% of its contemporaries.