↓ Skip to main content

False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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.
Title
False negative rates in Drosophila cell-based RNAi screens: a case study
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-12-50
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Booker, Anastasia A Samsonova, Young Kwon, Ian Flockhart, Stephanie E Mohr, Norbert Perrimon

Abstract

High-throughput screening using RNAi is a powerful gene discovery method but is often complicated by false positive and false negative results. Whereas false positive results associated with RNAi reagents has been a matter of extensive study, the issue of false negatives has received less attention.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 8%
United Kingdom 2 3%
Germany 2 3%
China 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
Unknown 60 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 7 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Professor 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 22%
Unspecified 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 5 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 January 2011.
All research outputs
#594,492
of 3,685,758 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#534
of 3,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,851
of 85,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#29
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,685,758 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 85,553 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.