↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of methods for correcting population stratification in a genome-wide association study of rheumatoid arthritis: principal-component analysis versus multidimensional scaling

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Proceedings, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 400)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
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
Comparison of methods for correcting population stratification in a genome-wide association study of rheumatoid arthritis: principal-component analysis versus multidimensional scaling
Published in
BMC Proceedings, December 2009
DOI 10.1186/1753-6561-3-s7-s109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dai Wang, Yu Sun, Paul Stang, Jesse A Berlin, Marsha A Wilcox, Qingqin Li

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Sweden 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 107 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 24%
Researcher 28 24%
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 3%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 12 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 8%
Psychology 7 6%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 14 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 June 2013.
All research outputs
#3,798,945
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Proceedings
#39
of 400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,628
of 173,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Proceedings
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 400 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 173,416 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them