↓ Skip to main content

Assessing quality and completeness of human transcriptional regulatory pathways on a genome-wide scale

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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.
Title
Assessing quality and completeness of human transcriptional regulatory pathways on a genome-wide scale
Published in
Biology Direct, February 2011
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-6-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evgeny Shmelkov, Zuojian Tang, Iannis Aifantis, Alexander Statnikov

Abstract

Pathway databases are becoming increasingly important and almost omnipresent in most types of biological and translational research. However, little is known about the quality and completeness of pathways stored in these databases. The present study conducts a comprehensive assessment of transcriptional regulatory pathways in humans for seven well-studied transcription factors: MYC, NOTCH1, BCL6, TP53, AR, STAT1, and RELA. The employed benchmarking methodology first involves integrating genome-wide binding with functional gene expression data to derive direct targets of transcription factors. Then the lists of experimentally obtained direct targets are compared with relevant lists of transcriptional targets from 10 commonly used pathway databases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 4%
Germany 3 3%
Belgium 2 2%
United States 2 2%
India 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 95 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 44 39%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 20%
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 7 6%
Professor 5 4%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 7 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 58 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 11%
Computer Science 8 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 6%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 10 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,705,775
of 19,982,192 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#77
of 570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,927
of 239,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#13
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,982,192 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 239,240 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 55% of its contemporaries.