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 |
Weighted multiple testing procedures for genomic studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BioData Mining, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0381-5-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jiang Gui, Tor D Tosteson, Mark Borsuk |
| Abstract |
With the rapid development of biological technology, measurement of thousands of genes or SNPs can be carried out simultaneously. Improved procedures for multiple hypothesis testing when the number of tests is very large are critical for interpreting genomic data. In this paper, we review recent developments on three distinct but closely related methods involving p-value weighting to improve statistical power while also controlling for the false discovery rate or the family wise error rate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 3 | 33% |
| Canada | 2 | 22% |
| Colombia | 1 | 11% |
| Sweden | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 56% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 7% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 82% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 33% |
| Researcher | 17 | 30% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 14% |
| Mathematics | 7 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 October 2013.
All research outputs
#5,931,816
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#125
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,051
of 166,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 166,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them