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 |
QAPA: a new method for the systematic analysis of alternative polyadenylation from RNA-seq data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-018-1414-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin C. H. Ha, Benjamin J. Blencowe, Quaid Morris |
| Abstract |
Alternative polyadenylation (APA) affects most mammalian genes. The genome-wide investigation of APA has been hampered by an inability to reliably profile it using conventional RNA-seq. We describe 'Quantification of APA' (QAPA), a method that infers APA from conventional RNA-seq data. QAPA is faster and more sensitive than other methods. Application of QAPA reveals discrete, temporally coordinated APA programs during neurogenesis and that there is little overlap between genes regulated by alternative splicing and those by APA. Modeling of these data uncovers an APA sequence code. QAPA thus enables the discovery and characterization of programs of regulated APA using conventional RNA-seq. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 | 21 | 41% |
| Canada | 6 | 12% |
| Switzerland | 4 | 8% |
| Germany | 2 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| France | 2 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 31 | 61% |
| Members of the public | 18 | 35% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 189 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 189 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 26% |
| Researcher | 35 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 10% |
| Unknown | 46 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 51 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 50 | 26% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 10% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 23 April 2018.
All research outputs
#1,412,159
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,121
of 4,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,786
of 344,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#14
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,468 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 74% 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 344,304 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 60% of its contemporaries.