↓ Skip to main content

Statistical Object Data Analysis of Taxonomic Trees from Human Microbiome Data

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Statistical Object Data Analysis of Taxonomic Trees from Human Microbiome Data
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0048996
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricio S. La Rosa, Berkley Shands, Elena Deych, Yanjiao Zhou, Erica Sodergren, George Weinstock, William D. Shannon

Abstract

Human microbiome research characterizes the microbial content of samples from human habitats to learn how interactions between bacteria and their host might impact human health. In this work a novel parametric statistical inference method based on object-oriented data analysis (OODA) for analyzing HMP data is proposed. OODA is an emerging area of statistical inference where the goal is to apply statistical methods to objects such as functions, images, and graphs or trees. The data objects that pertain to this work are taxonomic trees of bacteria built from analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences (e.g. using RDP); there is one such object for each biological sample analyzed. Our goal is to model and formally compare a set of trees. The contribution of our work is threefold: first, a weighted tree structure to analyze RDP data is introduced; second, using a probability measure to model a set of taxonomic trees, we introduce an approximate MLE procedure for estimating model parameters and we derive LRT statistics for comparing the distributions of two metagenomic populations; and third the Jumpstart HMP data is analyzed using the proposed model providing novel insights and future directions of analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 7%
Canada 2 2%
Sweden 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Estonia 1 1%
Unknown 71 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 24%
Student > Master 9 11%
Professor 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 5 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Mathematics 4 5%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 6 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,009,470
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#71,645
of 193,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,024
of 182,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,327
of 4,829 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 182,177 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,829 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.