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 |
Tensorial blind source separation for improved analysis of multi-omic data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-018-1455-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew E. Teschendorff, Han Jing, Dirk S. Paul, Joni Virta, Klaus Nordhausen |
| Abstract |
There is an increased need for integrative analyses of multi-omic data. We present and benchmark a novel tensorial independent component analysis (tICA) algorithm against current state-of-the-art methods. We find that tICA outperforms competing methods in identifying biological sources of data variation at a reduced computational cost. On epigenetic data, tICA can identify methylation quantitative trait loci at high sensitivity. In the cancer context, tICA identifies gene modules whose expression variation across tumours is driven by copy-number or DNA methylation changes, but whose deregulation relative to normal tissue is independent of such alterations, a result we validate by direct analysis of individual data types. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 | 4 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| France | 1 | 7% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
| Scientists | 5 | 36% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 13% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 25 July 2019.
All research outputs
#6,278,831
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#3,020
of 4,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,550
of 342,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#32
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 342,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.