↓ Skip to main content

Understanding sequencing data as compositions: an outlook and review

Overview of attention for article published in Bioinformatics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
2 Redditors
podcasts
1 podcast

Readers on

mendeley
615 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Understanding sequencing data as compositions: an outlook and review
Published in
Bioinformatics, March 2018
DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty175
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although seldom acknowledged explicitly, count data generated by sequencing platforms exist as compositions for which the abundance of each component (e.g., gene or transcript) is only coherently interpretable relative to other components within that sample. This property arises from the assay technology itself, whereby the number of counts recorded for each sample is constrained by an arbitrary total sum (i.e., library size). Consequently, sequencing data, as compositional data, exist in a non-Euclidean space that, without normalization or transformation, renders invalid many conventional analyses, including distance measures, correlation coefficients, and multivariate statistical models. The purpose of this review is to summarize the principles of compositional data analysis (CoDA), provide evidence for why sequencing data are compositional, discuss compositionally valid methods available for analyzing sequencing data, and highlight future directions with regard to this field of study. [email protected]. Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 615 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 615 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 115 19%
Researcher 114 19%
Student > Master 82 13%
Student > Bachelor 49 8%
Other 22 4%
Other 68 11%
Unknown 165 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 137 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 121 20%
Environmental Science 32 5%
Computer Science 31 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 19 3%
Other 88 14%
Unknown 187 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 16 December 2024.
All research outputs
#1,429,417
of 34,271,801 outputs
Outputs from Bioinformatics
#417
of 14,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,040
of 372,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioinformatics
#8
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,271,801 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 14,458 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 372,722 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.