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 |
Observation weights unlock bulk RNA-seq tools for zero inflation and single-cell applications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-018-1406-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Koen Van den Berge, Fanny Perraudeau, Charlotte Soneson, Michael I. Love, Davide Risso, Jean-Philippe Vert, Mark D. Robinson, Sandrine Dudoit, Lieven Clement |
| Abstract |
Dropout events in single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) cause many transcripts to go undetected and induce an excess of zero read counts, leading to power issues in differential expression (DE) analysis. This has triggered the development of bespoke scRNA-seq DE methods to cope with zero inflation. Recent evaluations, however, have shown that dedicated scRNA-seq tools provide no advantage compared to traditional bulk RNA-seq tools. We introduce a weighting strategy, based on a zero-inflated negative binomial model, that identifies excess zero counts and generates gene- and cell-specific weights to unlock bulk RNA-seq DE pipelines for zero-inflated data, boosting performance for scRNA-seq. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 92 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 | 18 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 12 | 13% |
| Australia | 7 | 8% |
| Germany | 7 | 8% |
| France | 5 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 3% |
| Finland | 3 | 3% |
| Austria | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 23 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 54 | 59% |
| Members of the public | 36 | 39% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 305 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 305 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 70 | 23% |
| Researcher | 63 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 14% |
| Unknown | 65 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 77 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 64 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 25 | 8% |
| Mathematics | 14 | 5% |
| Engineering | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 43 | 14% |
| Unknown | 71 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. 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 10 November 2022.
All research outputs
#699,172
of 25,779,988 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#441
of 4,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,731
of 345,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#7
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,779,988 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 4,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 345,015 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 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.