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 |
Creating and analyzing pathway and protein interaction compendia for modelling signal transduction networks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Systems Biology, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1752-0509-6-29 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel C Kirouac, Julio Saez-Rodriguez, Jennifer Swantek, John M Burke, Douglas A Lauffenburger, Peter K Sorger |
| Abstract |
Understanding the information-processing capabilities of signal transduction networks, how those networks are disrupted in disease, and rationally designing therapies to manipulate diseased states require systematic and accurate reconstruction of network topology. Data on networks central to human physiology, such as the inflammatory signalling networks analyzed here, are found in a multiplicity of on-line resources of pathway and interactome databases (Cancer CellMap, GeneGo, KEGG, NCI-Pathway Interactome Database (NCI-PID), PANTHER, Reactome, I2D, and STRING). We sought to determine whether these databases contain overlapping information and whether they can be used to construct high reliability prior knowledge networks for subsequent modeling of experimental data. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 1 | 20% |
| Guinea | 1 | 20% |
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 4% |
| Germany | 3 | 1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Latvia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 199 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 29% |
| Researcher | 60 | 27% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 106 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 37 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 18 | 8% |
| Engineering | 13 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 August 2019.
All research outputs
#8,034,837
of 24,155,398 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#321
of 1,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,980
of 166,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,155,398 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,134 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 166,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 62% of its contemporaries.