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 |
Mathematical and computational modeling in biology at multiple scales
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1742-4682-11-52 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jack A Tuszynski, Philip Winter, Diana White, Chih-Yuan Tseng, Kamlesh K Sahu, Francesco Gentile, Ivana Spasevska, Sara Ibrahim Omar, Niloofar Nayebi, Cassandra DM Churchill, Mariusz Klobukowski, Rabab M Abou El-Magd |
| Abstract |
A variety of topics are reviewed in the area of mathematical and computational modeling in biology, covering the range of scales from populations of organisms to electrons in atoms. The use of maximum entropy as an inference tool in the fields of biology and drug discovery is discussed. Mathematical and computational methods and models in the areas of epidemiology, cell physiology and cancer are surveyed. The technique of molecular dynamics is covered, with special attention to force fields for protein simulations and methods for the calculation of solvation free energies. The utility of quantum mechanical methods in biophysical and biochemical modeling is explored. The field of computational enzymology is examined. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 9% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 24 | 26% |
| Unknown | 16 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 April 2023.
All research outputs
#4,716,900
of 23,578,918 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
#63
of 284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,086
of 356,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,578,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 356,080 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.