| Title |
CHANCE: comprehensive software for quality control and validation of ChIP-seq data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2012-13-10-r98 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aaron Diaz, Abhinav Nellore, Jun S Song |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: ChIP-seq is a powerful method for obtaining genome-wide maps of protein-DNA interactions and epigenetic modifications. CHANCE (CHip-seq ANalytics and Confidence Estimation) is a standalone package for ChIP-seq quality control and protocol optimization. Our user-friendly graphical software quickly estimates the strength and quality of immunoprecipitations, identifies biases, compares the user's data with ENCODE's large collection of published datasets, performs multi-sample normalization, checks against quantitative PCR-validated control regions, and produces informative graphical reports. CHANCE is available at https://github.com/songlab/chance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 15% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 10 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 8 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 179 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 64 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 32 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 115 | 57% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 38 | 19% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 4% |
| Unknown | 20 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 25 February 2016.
All research outputs
#1,159,801
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#862
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,973
of 192,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#11
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 192,678 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.