| Title |
Which gene did you mean?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, June 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-6-142 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barend Mons |
| Abstract |
Computational Biology needs computer-readable information records. Increasingly, meta-analysed and pre-digested information is being used in the follow up of high throughput experiments and other investigations that yield massive data sets. Semantic enrichment of plain text is crucial for computer aided analysis. In general people will think about semantic tagging as just another form of text mining, and that term has quite a negative connotation in the minds of some biologists who have been disappointed by classical approaches of text mining. Efforts so far have tried to develop tools and technologies that retrospectively extract the correct information from text, which is usually full of ambiguities. Although remarkable results have been obtained in experimental circumstances, the wide spread use of information mining tools is lagging behind earlier expectations. This commentary proposes to make semantic tagging an integral process to electronic publishing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 19% |
| Germany | 2 | 13% |
| Sweden | 2 | 13% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Uganda | 1 | 6% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 6% |
| Italy | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 5 | 31% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 2% |
| Philippines | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 82% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 26% |
| Unknown | 7 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 34% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 20 September 2023.
All research outputs
#2,651,143
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#687
of 7,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,508
of 68,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#2
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 68,332 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 34 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 94% of its contemporaries.