↓ Skip to main content

Visual analytics for concept exploration in subspaces of patient groups

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Informatics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 103)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Visual analytics for concept exploration in subspaces of patient groups
Published in
Brain Informatics, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40708-016-0043-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Hund, Dominic Böhm, Werner Sturm, Michael Sedlmair, Tobias Schreck, Torsten Ullrich, Daniel A. Keim, Ljiljana Majnaric, Andreas Holzinger

Abstract

Medical doctors and researchers in bio-medicine are increasingly confronted with complex patient data, posing new and difficult analysis challenges. These data are often comprising high-dimensional descriptions of patient conditions and measurements on the success of certain therapies. An important analysis question in such data is to compare and correlate patient conditions and therapy results along with combinations of dimensions. As the number of dimensions is often very large, one needs to map them to a smaller number of relevant dimensions to be more amenable for expert analysis. This is because irrelevant, redundant, and conflicting dimensions can negatively affect effectiveness and efficiency of the analytic process (the so-called curse of dimensionality). However, the possible mappings from high- to low-dimensional spaces are ambiguous. For example, the similarity between patients may change by considering different combinations of relevant dimensions (subspaces). We demonstrate the potential of subspace analysis for the interpretation of high-dimensional medical data. Specifically, we present SubVIS, an interactive tool to visually explore subspace clusters from different perspectives, introduce a novel analysis workflow, and discuss future directions for high-dimensional (medical) data analysis and its visual exploration. We apply the presented workflow to a real-world dataset from the medical domain and show its usefulness with a domain expert evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 16 44%
Engineering 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Psychology 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 10 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 January 2021.
All research outputs
#5,904,928
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Brain Informatics
#29
of 103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,093
of 299,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Informatics
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 299,546 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 71% of its contemporaries.
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 69% of its contemporaries.