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 |
GO-based Functional Dissimilarity of Gene Sets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-12-360 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Norberto Díaz-Díaz, Jesús S Aguilar-Ruiz |
| Abstract |
The Gene Ontology (GO) provides a controlled vocabulary for describing the functions of genes and can be used to evaluate the functional coherence of gene sets. Many functional coherence measures consider each pair of gene functions in a set and produce an output based on all pairwise distances. A single gene can encode multiple proteins that may differ in function. For each functionality, other proteins that exhibit the same activity may also participate. Therefore, an identification of the most common function for all of the genes involved in a biological process is important in evaluating the functional similarity of groups of genes and a quantification of functional coherence can helps to clarify the role of a group of genes working together. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 49 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 31% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 26% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 2 | 3% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 29 | 48% |
| Computer Science | 21 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 2 | 3% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 September 2011.
All research outputs
#19,015,492
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,459
of 7,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,509
of 126,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#71
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,400 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 126,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.