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 |
OncoNEM: inferring tumor evolution from single-cell sequencing data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-016-0929-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edith M. Ross, Florian Markowetz |
| Abstract |
Single-cell sequencing promises a high-resolution view of genetic heterogeneity and clonal evolution in cancer. However, methods to infer tumor evolution from single-cell sequencing data lag behind methods developed for bulk-sequencing data. Here, we present OncoNEM, a probabilistic method for inferring intra-tumor evolutionary lineage trees from somatic single nucleotide variants of single cells. OncoNEM identifies homogeneous cellular subpopulations and infers their genotypes as well as a tree describing their evolutionary relationships. In simulation studies, we assess OncoNEM's robustness and benchmark its performance against competing methods. Finally, we show its applicability in case studies of muscle-invasive bladder cancer and essential thrombocythemia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 Kingdom | 7 | 29% |
| United States | 7 | 29% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Austria | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 50% |
| Scientists | 10 | 42% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | 1% |
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 241 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 63 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 56 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 85 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 64 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 30 | 12% |
| Mathematics | 10 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 5% |
| Unknown | 44 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,022,095
of 25,481,734 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#723
of 4,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,678
of 314,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#16
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,481,734 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,480 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 83% 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 314,093 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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.