↓ Skip to main content

ASBMB

Methods, Tools and Current Perspectives in Proteogenomics*

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
59 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
301 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Methods, Tools and Current Perspectives in Proteogenomics*
Published in
Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, April 2017
DOI 10.1074/mcp.mr117.000024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly V. Ruggles, Karsten Krug, Xiaojing Wang, Karl R. Clauser, Jing Wang, Samuel H. Payne, David Fenyö, Bing Zhang, D.R. Mani

Abstract

With combined technological advancements in high-throughput next-generation sequencing and deep mass spectrometry-based proteomics, proteogenomics, i.e., the integrative analysis of proteomic and genomic data, has emerged as a new research field. Early efforts in the field were focused on improving protein identification using sample-specific genomic and transcriptomic sequencing data. More recently, integrative analysis of quantitative measurements from genomic and proteomic studies have identified novel insights into gene expression regulation, cell signaling, and disease. Many methods and tools have been developed or adapted to enable an array of integrative proteogenomic approaches and in this article, we systematically classify published methods and tools into four major categories, (1) Sequence-centric proteogenomics; (2) Analysis of proteogenomic relationships; (3) Integrative modeling of proteogenomic data; and (4) Data sharing and visualization. We provide a comprehensive review of methods and available tools in each category and highlight their typical applications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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 301 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 296 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 23%
Researcher 66 22%
Student > Bachelor 31 10%
Student > Master 29 10%
Other 13 4%
Other 33 11%
Unknown 61 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 110 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 65 22%
Computer Science 12 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 3%
Chemistry 8 3%
Other 26 9%
Unknown 70 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 29 November 2021.
All research outputs
#828,623
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Molecular and Cellular Proteomics
#53
of 3,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,891
of 324,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular and Cellular Proteomics
#2
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 324,890 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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.