↓ Skip to main content

SNPest: a probabilistic graphical model for estimating genotypes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
SNPest: a probabilistic graphical model for estimating genotypes
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-7-698
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stinus Lindgreen, Anders Krogh, Jakob Skou Pedersen

Abstract

As the use of next-generation sequencing technologies is becoming more widespread, the need for robust software to help with the analysis is growing as well. A key challenge when analyzing sequencing data is the prediction of genotypes from the reads, i.e. correct inference of the underlying DNA sequences that gave rise to the sequenced fragments. For diploid organisms, the genotyper should be able to predict both alleles in the individual. Variations between the individual and the population can then be analyzed by looking for SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) in order to investigate diseases or phenotypic features. To perform robust and high confidence genotyping and SNP calling, methods are needed that take the technology specific limitations into account and can model different sources of error. As an example, ancient DNA poses special challenges as the data is often shallow and subject to errors induced by post mortem damage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 5%
France 1 5%
Unknown 18 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 40%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 30%
Other 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 25%
Computer Science 3 15%
Unknown 2 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 June 2015.
All research outputs
#7,148,744
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,122
of 4,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,092
of 256,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#28
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,306 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 256,264 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.