↓ Skip to main content

Bioinformatics and Systems Biology: bridging the gap between heterogeneous student backgrounds

Overview of attention for article published in Briefings in Bioinformatics, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Bioinformatics and Systems Biology: bridging the gap between heterogeneous student backgrounds
Published in
Briefings in Bioinformatics, April 2013
DOI 10.1093/bib/bbt023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanne Abeln, Douwe Molenaar, K Anton Feenstra, Huub C J Hoefsloot, Bas Teusink, Jaap Heringa

Abstract

Teaching students with very diverse backgrounds can be extremely challenging. This article uses the Bioinformatics and Systems Biology MSc in Amsterdam as a case study to describe how the knowledge gap for students with heterogeneous backgrounds can be bridged. We show that a mix in backgrounds can be turned into an advantage by creating a stimulating learning environment for the students. In the MSc Programme, conversion classes help to bridge differences between students, by mending initial knowledge and skill gaps. Mixing students from different backgrounds in a group to solve a complex task creates an opportunity for the students to reflect on their own abilities. We explain how a truly interdisciplinary approach to teaching helps students of all backgrounds to achieve the MSc end terms. Moreover, transferable skills obtained by the students in such a mixed study environment are invaluable for their later careers.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
Netherlands 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 2%
Czechia 1 2%
Unknown 53 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Professor 7 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 19%
Computer Science 6 10%
Chemistry 3 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 12 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 October 2013.
All research outputs
#2,925,422
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#406
of 2,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,581
of 197,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#7
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 197,527 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.