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 |
CoINcIDE: A framework for discovery of patient subtypes across multiple datasets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Medicine, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13073-016-0281-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine R. Planey, Olivier Gevaert |
| Abstract |
Patient disease subtypes have the potential to transform personalized medicine. However, many patient subtypes derived from unsupervised clustering analyses on high-dimensional datasets are not replicable across multiple datasets, limiting their clinical utility. We present CoINcIDE, a novel methodological framework for the discovery of patient subtypes across multiple datasets that requires no between-dataset transformations. We also present a high-quality database collection, curatedBreastData, with over 2,500 breast cancer gene expression samples. We use CoINcIDE to discover novel breast and ovarian cancer subtypes with prognostic significance and novel hypothesized ovarian therapeutic targets across multiple datasets. CoINcIDE and curatedBreastData are available as R packages. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 | 17% |
| Spain | 2 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 58% |
| Scientists | 4 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 63 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 9 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 11% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 04 November 2020.
All research outputs
#2,799,028
of 25,402,528 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#641
of 1,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,354
of 314,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#24
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,528 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 1,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 314,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.