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 |
Comparison of gene expression microarray data with count-based RNA measurements informs microarray interpretation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-15-649 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arianne C Richard, Paul A Lyons, James E Peters, Daniele Biasci, Shaun M Flint, James C Lee, Eoin F McKinney, Richard M Siegel, Kenneth GC Smith |
| Abstract |
Although numerous investigations have compared gene expression microarray platforms, preprocessing methods and batch correction algorithms using constructed spike-in or dilution datasets, there remains a paucity of studies examining the properties of microarray data using diverse biological samples. Most microarray experiments seek to identify subtle differences between samples with variable background noise, a scenario poorly represented by constructed datasets. Thus, microarray users lack important information regarding the complexities introduced in real-world experimental settings. The recent development of a multiplexed, digital technology for nucleic acid measurement enables counting of individual RNA molecules without amplification and, for the first time, permits such a study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 96 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 29 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 45 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,801,532
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,246
of 10,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,617
of 231,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#124
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,742 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 231,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.