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 |
Biocuration of functional annotation at the European nucleotide archive
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nucleic Acids Research, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1093/nar/gkv1311 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard Gibson, Blaise Alako, Clara Amid, Ana Cerdeño-Tárraga, Iain Cleland, Neil Goodgame, Petra ten Hoopen, Suran Jayathilaka, Simon Kay, Rasko Leinonen, Xin Liu, Swapna Pallreddy, Nima Pakseresht, Jeena Rajan, Marc Rosselló, Nicole Silvester, Dmitriy Smirnov, Ana Luisa Toribio, Daniel Vaughan, Vadim Zalunin, Guy Cochrane |
| Abstract |
The European Nucleotide Archive (ENA; http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena) is a repository for the submission, maintenance and presentation of nucleotide sequence data and related sample and experimental information. In this article we report on ENA in 2015 regarding general activity, notable published data sets and major achievements. This is followed by a focus on sustainable biocuration of functional annotation, an area which has particularly felt the pressure of sequencing growth. The importance of functional annotation, how it can be submitted and the shifting role of the biocurator in the context of increasing volumes of data are all discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 26% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 19% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,753,975
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Nucleic Acids Research
#12,770
of 26,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,974
of 391,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nucleic Acids Research
#228
of 384 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 26,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 391,055 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 384 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.