↓ Skip to main content

Why most Principal Component Analyses (PCA) in population genetic studies are wrong

Overview of attention for article published in bioRxiv
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
87 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
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
Why most Principal Component Analyses (PCA) in population genetic studies are wrong
Published in
bioRxiv
DOI 10.1101/2021.04.11.439381
Authors

Elhaik, Eran

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 87 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 04 May 2021.
All research outputs
#546,266
of 17,622,231 outputs
Outputs from bioRxiv
#5,091
of 120,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,171
of 246,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from bioRxiv
#230
of 5,589 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,622,231 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 120,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 246,548 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,589 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 95% of its contemporaries.