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 |
Emerging evidence for functional peptides encoded by short open reading frames
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Reviews Genetics, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nrg3520 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shea J. Andrews, Joseph A. Rothnagel |
| Abstract |
Short open reading frames (sORFs) are a common feature of all genomes, but their coding potential has mostly been disregarded, partly because of the difficulty in determining whether these sequences are translated. Recent innovations in computing, proteomics and high-throughput analyses of translation start sites have begun to address this challenge and have identified hundreds of putative coding sORFs. The translation of some of these has been confirmed, although the contribution of their peptide products to cellular functions remains largely unknown. This Review examines this hitherto overlooked component of the proteome and considers potential roles for sORF-encoded peptides. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 3 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
| France | 2 | 12% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 53% |
| Scientists | 7 | 41% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 769 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 2% |
| Germany | 7 | <1% |
| Brazil | 4 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 3 | <1% |
| Japan | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 1% |
| Unknown | 722 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 164 | 21% |
| Researcher | 151 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 93 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 86 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 33 | 4% |
| Other | 102 | 13% |
| Unknown | 140 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 275 | 36% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 235 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 17 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 15 | 2% |
| Other | 49 | 6% |
| Unknown | 149 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 02 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,103,585
of 24,703,227 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Genetics
#562
of 2,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,799
of 324,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Genetics
#7
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,703,227 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 324,507 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.