↓ Skip to main content

f-scLVM: scalable and versatile factor analysis for single-cell RNA-seq

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology (Online Edition), November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
81 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
208 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
f-scLVM: scalable and versatile factor analysis for single-cell RNA-seq
Published in
Genome Biology (Online Edition), November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13059-017-1334-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florian Buettner, Naruemon Pratanwanich, Davis J. McCarthy, John C. Marioni, Oliver Stegle

Abstract

Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) allows studying heterogeneity in gene expression in large cell populations. Such heterogeneity can arise due to technical or biological factors, making decomposing sources of variation difficult. We here describe f-scLVM (factorial single-cell latent variable model), a method based on factor analysis that uses pathway annotations to guide the inference of interpretable factors underpinning the heterogeneity. Our model jointly estimates the relevance of individual factors, refines gene set annotations, and infers factors without annotation. In applications to multiple scRNA-seq datasets, we find that f-scLVM robustly decomposes scRNA-seq datasets into interpretable components, thereby facilitating the identification of novel subpopulations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 81 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 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 208 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 29%
Researcher 42 20%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Student > Master 21 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 4%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 38 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 59 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 20%
Computer Science 33 16%
Mathematics 8 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 3%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 41 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 28 August 2019.
All research outputs
#539,641
of 19,537,318 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#426
of 3,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,147
of 336,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology (Online Edition)
#49
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,537,318 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 336,284 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.