↓ Skip to main content

DoCM: a database of curated mutations in cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Methods, September 2016
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
42 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
DoCM: a database of curated mutations in cancer
Published in
Nature Methods, September 2016
DOI 10.1038/nmeth.4000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin J Ainscough, Malachi Griffith, Adam C Coffman, Alex H Wagner, Jason Kunisaki, Mayank NK Choudhary, Joshua F McMichael, Robert S Fulton, Richard K Wilson, Obi L Griffith, Elaine R Mardis

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Korea, Republic of 2 5%
United Kingdom 1 2%
China 1 2%
Turkey 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 35 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 44%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Other 6 14%
Student > Master 4 9%
Professor 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 37%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 1 2%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 01 November 2016.
All research outputs
#368,035
of 8,603,451 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#576
of 2,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,781
of 254,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#31
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,603,451 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 2,932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. 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 254,282 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 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 67% of its contemporaries.