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 |
NeatMap - non-clustering heat map alternatives in R
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, January 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-11-45 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Satwik Rajaram, Yoshi Oono |
| Abstract |
The clustered heat map is the most popular means of visualizing genomic data. It compactly displays a large amount of data in an intuitive format that facilitates the detection of hidden structures and relations in the data. However, it is hampered by its use of cluster analysis which does not always respect the intrinsic relations in the data, often requiring non-standardized reordering of rows/columns to be performed post-clustering. This sometimes leads to uninformative and/or misleading conclusions. Often it is more informative to use dimension-reduction algorithms (such as Principal Component Analysis and Multi-Dimensional Scaling) which respect the topology inherent in the data. Yet, despite their proven utility in the analysis of biological data, they are not as widely used. This is at least partially due to the lack of user-friendly visualization methods with the visceral impact of the heat map. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 5% |
| Germany | 4 | 2% |
| Brazil | 4 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| Belgium | 3 | 1% |
| Norway | 2 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 3% |
| Unknown | 172 | 82% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 84 | 40% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 32 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 120 | 57% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 10 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 28 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 July 2016.
All research outputs
#13,399,716
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,194
of 7,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,291
of 164,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#36
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 164,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.