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 |
Bioinformatic pipelines in Python with Leaf
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-14-201 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesco Napolitano, Renato Mariani-Costantini, Roberto Tagliaferri |
| Abstract |
An incremental, loosely planned development approach is often used in bioinformatic studies when dealing with custom data analysis in a rapidly changing environment. Unfortunately, the lack of a rigorous software structuring can undermine the maintainability, communicability and replicability of the process. To ameliorate this problem we propose the Leaf system, the aim of which is to seamlessly introduce the pipeline formality on top of a dynamical development process with minimum overhead for the programmer, thus providing a simple layer of software structuring. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 | 9 | 35% |
| Norway | 2 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 62% |
| Scientists | 9 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 4 | 4% |
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 39 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 46% |
| Computer Science | 19 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 9% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 12 June 2015.
All research outputs
#1,526,708
of 24,666,614 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#246
of 7,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,630
of 201,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#5
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,666,614 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,565 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 201,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.