↓ Skip to main content

PCAN: phenotype consensus analysis to support disease-gene association

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
PCAN: phenotype consensus analysis to support disease-gene association
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1401-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrice Godard, Matthew Page

Abstract

Bridging genotype and phenotype is a fundamental biomedical challenge that underlies more effective target discovery and patient-tailored therapy. Approaches that can flexibly and intuitively, integrate known gene-phenotype associations in the context of molecular signaling networks are vital to effectively prioritize and biologically interpret genes underlying disease traits of interest. We describe Phenotype Consensus Analysis (PCAN); a method to assess the consensus semantic similarity of phenotypes in a candidate gene's signaling neighborhood. We demonstrate that significant phenotype consensus (p < 0.05) is observable for ~67% of 4,549 OMIM disease-gene associations, using a combination of high quality String interactions + Metabase pathways and use Joubert Syndrome to demonstrate the ease with which a significant result can be interrogated to highlight discriminatory traits linked to mechanistically related genes. We advocate phenotype consensus as an intuitive and versatile method to aid disease-gene association, which naturally lends itself to the mechanistic deconvolution of diverse phenotypes. We provide PCAN to the community as an R package ( http://bioconductor.org/packages/PCAN/ ) to allow flexible configuration, extension and standalone use or integration to supplement existing gene prioritization workflows.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 37%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 18%
Computer Science 5 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 April 2023.
All research outputs
#4,281,776
of 23,760,369 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#1,603
of 7,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,205
of 423,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#23
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,760,369 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 423,878 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 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.