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 |
R2R - software to speed the depiction of aesthetic consensus RNA secondary structures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, January 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-12-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zasha Weinberg, Ronald R Breaker |
| Abstract |
With continuing identification of novel structured noncoding RNAs, there is an increasing need to create schematic diagrams showing the consensus features of these molecules. RNA structural diagrams are typically made either with general-purpose drawing programs like Adobe Illustrator, or with automated or interactive programs specific to RNA. Unfortunately, the use of applications like Illustrator is extremely time consuming, while existing RNA-specific programs produce figures that are useful, but usually not of the same aesthetic quality as those produced at great cost in Illustrator. Additionally, most existing RNA-specific applications are designed for drawing single RNA molecules, not consensus diagrams. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 50% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 4% |
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 27% |
| Researcher | 32 | 23% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 60 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 22% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 24 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,442,716
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#776
of 7,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,805
of 180,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#5
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 180,345 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 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.