↓ Skip to main content

Integrated rare variant-based risk gene prioritization in disease case-control sequencing studies

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Genetics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Integrated rare variant-based risk gene prioritization in disease case-control sequencing studies
Published in
PLoS Genetics, December 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007142
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jhih-Rong Lin, Quanwei Zhang, Ying Cai, Bernice E. Morrow, Zhengdong D. Zhang

Abstract

Rare variants of major effect play an important role in human complex diseases and can be discovered by sequencing-based genome-wide association studies. Here, we introduce an integrated approach that combines the rare variant association test with gene network and phenotype information to identify risk genes implicated by rare variants for human complex diseases. Our data integration method follows a 'discovery-driven' strategy without relying on prior knowledge about the disease and thus maintains the unbiased character of genome-wide association studies. Simulations reveal that our method can outperform a widely-used rare variant association test method by 2 to 3 times. In a case study of a small disease cohort, we uncovered putative risk genes and the corresponding rare variants that may act as genetic modifiers of congenital heart disease in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome patients. These variants were missed by a conventional approach that relied on the rare variant association test alone.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Professor 4 9%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Computer Science 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 13 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 January 2018.
All research outputs
#4,537,346
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Genetics
#3,462
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,208
of 449,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Genetics
#48
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 449,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.