↓ Skip to main content

Extending and encoding existing biological terminologies and datasets for use in the reasoned semantic web

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Semantics, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Extending and encoding existing biological terminologies and datasets for use in the reasoned semantic web
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/2041-1480-3-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Soroush Samadian, Bruce McManus, Mark D Wilkinson

Abstract

Clinical phenotypes and disease-risk stratification are most often determined through the direct observations of clinicians in conjunction with published standards and guidelines, where the clinical expert is the final arbiter of the patient's classification. While this "human" approach is highly desirable in the context of personalized and optimal patient care, it is problematic in a healthcare research setting because the basis for the patient's classification is not transparent, and likely not reproducible from one clinical expert to another. This sits in opposition to the rigor required to execute, for example, Genome-wide association analyses and other high-throughput studies where a large number of variables are being compared to a complex disease phenotype. Most clinical classification systems and are not structured for automated classification, and similarly, clinical data is generally not represented in a form that lends itself to automated integration and interpretation. Here we apply Semantic Web technologies to the problem of automated, transparent interpretation of clinical data for use in high-throughput research environments, and explore migration-paths for existing data and legacy semantic standards.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 7%
United States 2 7%
United Kingdom 1 4%
Spain 1 4%
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 21 75%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 25%
Other 5 18%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 18%
Engineering 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 1 4%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 July 2012.
All research outputs
#14,931,785
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#209
of 358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,138
of 165,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 358 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 165,627 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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