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 |
The Software Ontology (SWO): a resource for reproducibility in biomedical data analysis, curation and digital preservation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2041-1480-5-25 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James Malone, Andy Brown, Allyson L Lister, Jon Ison, Duncan Hull, Helen Parkinson, Robert Stevens |
| Abstract |
Biomedical ontologists to date have concentrated on ontological descriptions of biomedical entities such as gene products and their attributes, phenotypes and so on. Recently, effort has diversified to descriptions of the laboratory investigations by which these entities were produced. However, much biological insight is gained from the analysis of the data produced from these investigations, and there is a lack of adequate descriptions of the wide range of software that are central to bioinformatics. We need to describe how data are analyzed for discovery, audit trails, provenance and reproducibility. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 Kingdom | 4 | 29% |
| United States | 2 | 14% |
| Colombia | 1 | 7% |
| Japan | 1 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 64% |
| Scientists | 5 | 36% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 22% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 22% |
| Unknown | 4 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 40 | 49% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 21% |
| Engineering | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 26 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,634,036
of 24,903,209 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#9
of 365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,025
of 232,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,903,209 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 365 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 232,591 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.