↓ Skip to main content

KPP: KEGG Pathway Painter

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
KPP: KEGG Pathway Painter
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/1752-0509-9-s2-s3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ganiraju Manyam, Aybike Birerdinc, Ancha Baranova

Abstract

High-throughput technologies became common tools to decipher genome-wide changes of gene expression (GE) patterns. Functional analysis of GE patterns is a daunting task as it requires often recourse to the public repositories of biological knowledge. On the other hand, in many cases researcher's inquiry can be served by a comprehensive glimpse. The KEGG PATHWAY database is a compilation of manually verified maps of biological interactions represented by the complete set of pathways related to signal transduction and other cellular processes. Rapid mapping of the differentially expressed genes to the KEGG pathways may provide an idea about the functional relevance of the gene lists corresponding to the high-throughput expression data. Here we present a web based graphic tool KEGG Pathway Painter (KPP). KPP paints pathways from the KEGG database using large sets of the candidate genes accompanied by "overexpressed" or "underexpressed" marks, for example, those generated by microarrays or miRNA profilings. KPP provides fast and comprehensive visualization of the global GE changes by consolidating a list of the color-coded candidate genes into the KEGG pathways. KPP is freely available and can be accessed at http://web.cos.gmu.edu/~gmanyam/kegg/.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Singapore 1 2%
Luxembourg 1 2%
Unknown 44 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 29%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Professor 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 10 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,475,267
of 24,292,134 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#480
of 1,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,543
of 268,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,292,134 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,130 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 268,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 61% of its contemporaries.