↓ Skip to main content

WorMachine: machine learning-based phenotypic analysis tool for worms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, January 2018
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 (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
47 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
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
WorMachine: machine learning-based phenotypic analysis tool for worms
Published in
BMC Biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12915-017-0477-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Hakim, Yael Mor, Itai Antoine Toker, Amir Levine, Moran Neuhof, Yishai Markovitz, Oded Rechavi

Abstract

Caenorhabditis elegans nematodes are powerful model organisms, yet quantification of visible phenotypes is still often labor-intensive, biased, and error-prone. We developed WorMachine, a three-step MATLAB-based image analysis software that allows (1) automated identification of C. elegans worms, (2) extraction of morphological features and quantification of fluorescent signals, and (3) machine learning techniques for high-level analysis. We examined the power of WorMachine using five separate representative assays: supervised classification of binary-sex phenotype, scoring continuous-sexual phenotypes, quantifying the effects of two different RNA interference treatments, and measuring intracellular protein aggregation. WorMachine is suitable for analysis of a variety of biological questions and provides an accurate and reproducible analysis tool for measuring diverse phenotypes. It serves as a "quick and easy," convenient, high-throughput, and automated solution for nematode research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 21%
Student > Bachelor 11 17%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 19%
Engineering 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 16 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 16 January 2020.
All research outputs
#839,369
of 20,406,949 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biology
#220
of 1,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,597
of 391,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,406,949 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 391,039 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them