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 importance of study design for detecting differentially abundant features in high-throughput experiments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-014-0527-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Huaien Luo, Juntao Li, Burton Kuan Hui Chia, Paul Robson, Niranjan Nagarajan |
| Abstract |
High-throughput assays, such as RNA-seq, to detect differential abundance are widely used. Variable performance across statistical tests, normalizations, and conditions leads to resource wastage and reduced sensitivity. EDDA represents a first, general design tool for RNA-seq, Nanostring, and metagenomic analysis, that rationally selects tests, predicts performance, and plans experiments to minimize resource wastage. Case studies highlight EDDA's ability to model single-cell RNA-seq, suggesting ways to reduce sequencing costs up to five-fold and improving metagenomic biomarker detection through improved test selection. EDDA's novel mode-based normalization for detecting differential abundance improves robustness by 10% to 20% and precision by up to 140%. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 States | 5 | 23% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 9% |
| Singapore | 2 | 9% |
| Norway | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| Sweden | 1 | 5% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 14 | 64% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| Sweden | 3 | 3% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Taiwan | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 89 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 37 | 35% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 57 | 54% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,659,211
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,363
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,946
of 368,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#26
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 368,274 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 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 74% of its contemporaries.