↓ Skip to main content

New Tools for Mendelian Disease Gene Identification: PhenoDB Variant Analysis Module; and GeneMatcher, a Web‐Based Tool for Linking Investigators with an Interest in the Same Gene

Overview of attention for article published in Human Mutation, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
New Tools for Mendelian Disease Gene Identification: PhenoDB Variant Analysis Module; and GeneMatcher, a Web‐Based Tool for Linking Investigators with an Interest in the Same Gene
Published in
Human Mutation, March 2015
DOI 10.1002/humu.22769
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nara Sobreira, François Schiettecatte, Corinne Boehm, David Valle, Ada Hamosh

Abstract

Identifying the causative variant from among the thousands identified by whole exome sequencing (WES) or whole genome sequencing (WGS) is a formidable challenge. To make this process as efficient and flexible as possible, we have developed a Variant Analysis Module coupled to our previously described web-based phenotype intake tool, PhenoDB (http://researchphenodb.net and http://phenodb.org). When a small number of candidate causative variants have been identified in a study of a particular patient or family, a second, more difficult challenge becomes proof of causality for any given variant. One approach to this problem is to find other cases with a similar phenotype and mutations in the same candidate gene. Alternatively, it may be possible to develop biological evidence for causality, an approach that is assisted by making connections to basic scientists studying the gene of interest, often in the setting of a model organism. Both of these strategies benefit from an open access, online site where individual clinicians and investigators could post genes of interest. To this end we developed GeneMatcher (http://genematcher.org), a freely accessible web site that enables connections between clinicians and researchers across the world who share an interest in the same gene(s). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 83 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Computer Science 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 17 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,517,992
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Human Mutation
#2,141
of 2,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,467
of 279,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Mutation
#16
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 279,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.