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 |
Comprehensive comparison of three commercial human whole-exome capture platforms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2011-12-9-r95 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Asan, Yu Xu, Hui Jiang, Chris Tyler-Smith, Yali Xue, Tao Jiang, Jiawei Wang, Mingzhi Wu, Xiao Liu, Geng Tian, Jun Wang, Jian Wang, Huangming Yang, Xiuqing Zhang |
| Abstract |
Exome sequencing, which allows the global analysis of protein coding sequences in the human genome, has become an effective and affordable approach to detecting causative genetic mutations in diseases. Currently, there are several commercial human exome capture platforms; however, the relative performances of these have not been characterized sufficiently to know which is best for a particular study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 276 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 1% |
| Unknown | 253 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 83 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 56 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 51 | 18% |
| Unknown | 28 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 142 | 51% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 44 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 5% |
| Unknown | 32 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,341,882
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,051
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,921
of 143,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#9
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 4,467 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 done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 143,029 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 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.