↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Anaconda: AN automated pipeline for somatic COpy Number variation Detection and Annotation from tumor exome sequencing data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Anaconda: AN automated pipeline for somatic COpy Number variation Detection and Annotation from tumor exome sequencing data
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1833-3
Pubmed ID
28974218
Authors

Jianing Gao, Changlin Wan, Huan Zhang, Ao Li, Qiguang Zang, Rongjun Ban, Asim Ali, Zhenghua Yu, Qinghua Shi, Xiaohua Jiang, Yuanwei Zhang

Abstract

Copy number variations (CNVs) are the main genetic structural variations in cancer genome. Detecting CNVs in genetic exome region is efficient and cost-effective in identifying cancer associated genes. Many tools had been developed accordingly and yet these tools lack of reliability because of high false negative rate, which is intrinsically caused by genome exonic bias. To provide an alternative option, here, we report Anaconda, a comprehensive pipeline that allows flexible integration of multiple CNV-calling methods and systematic annotation of CNVs in analyzing WES data. Just by one command, Anaconda can generate CNV detection result by up to four CNV detecting tools. Associated with comprehensive annotation analysis of genes involved in shared CNV regions, Anaconda is able to deliver a more reliable and useful report in assistance with CNV-associate cancer researches. Anaconda package and manual can be freely accessed at http://mcg.ustc.edu.cn/bsc/ANACONDA/ .

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Master 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 18%
Computer Science 6 15%
Engineering 4 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 20%

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 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,766,415
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,303
of 7,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,023
of 323,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#50
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 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 7,387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. 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 323,851 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 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 51% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.