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 |
Case-Control Association Testing of Common Variants from Sequencing of DNA Pools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0065410 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Allan F. McRae, Melinda M. Richter, Penelope A. Lind |
| Abstract |
While genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been successful in identifying a large number of variants associated with disease, the challenge of locating the underlying causal loci remains. Sequencing of case and control DNA pools provides an inexpensive method for assessing all variation in a genomic region surrounding a significant GWAS result. However, individual variants need to be ranked in terms of the strength of their association to disease in order to prioritise follow-up by individual genotyping. A simple method for testing for case-control association in sequence data from DNA pools is presented that allows the partitioning of the variance in allele frequency estimates into components due to the sampling of chromosomes from the pool during sequencing, sampling individuals from the population and unequal contribution from individuals during pool construction. The utility of this method is demonstrated on a sequence from the alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) gene cluster on a case-control sample for heavy alcohol consumption. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 33% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 22% |
| Researcher | 2 | 22% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 56% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
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 27 June 2013.
All research outputs
#14,171,982
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#115,902
of 193,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,211
of 197,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,638
of 4,574 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 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 193,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 197,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,574 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.