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 |
Comparing thousands of circular genomes using the CGView Comparison Tool
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-13-202 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jason R Grant, Adriano S Arantes, Paul Stothard |
| Abstract |
Continued sequencing efforts coupled with advances in sequencing technology will lead to the completion of a vast number of small genomes. Whole-genome comparisons represent an important part of the analysis of any new genome sequence, as they can provide a better understanding of the biology and evolution of the source organism. Visualization of the results is important, as it allows information from a variety of sources to be integrated and interpreted. However, existing graphical comparison tools lack features needed for efficiently comparing a new genome to hundreds or thousands of existing sequences. Moreover, existing tools are limited in terms of the types of comparisons that can be performed, the extent to which the output can be customized, and the ease with which the entire process can be automated. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
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 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 2% |
| Chile | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 225 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 68 | 28% |
| Researcher | 60 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 12% |
| Unknown | 26 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 112 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 49 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 13 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 9% |
| Unknown | 30 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 27 May 2014.
All research outputs
#4,485,080
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,871
of 10,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,920
of 164,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#11
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,615 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 164,339 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.