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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Systematic biases in DNA copy number originate from isolation procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/gb-2013-14-4-r33 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sebastiaan van Heesch, Michal Mokry, Veronika Boskova, Wade Junker, Rajdeep Mehon, Pim Toonen, Ewart de Bruijn, James D Shull, Timothy J Aitman, Edwin Cuppen, Victor Guryev |
| Abstract |
BACKGROUND: The ability to accurately detect DNA copy number variation in both a sensitive and quantitative manner is important in many research areas. However, genome-wide DNA copy number analyses are complicated by variations in detection signal. RESULTS: While GC content has been used to correct for this, here we show that coverage biases are tissue-specific and independent of the detection method as demonstrated by next-generation sequencing and array CGH. Moreover, we show that DNA isolation stringency affects the degree of equimolar coverage and that the observed biases coincide with chromatin characteristics like gene expression, genomic isochores, and replication timing. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that chromatin organization is a main determinant for differential DNA retrieval. These findings are highly relevant for germline and somatic DNA copy number variation analyses. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 4 | 27% |
| United States | 4 | 27% |
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 7 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 47% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Czechia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 27 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 51 | 54% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 22 May 2015.
All research outputs
#4,535,152
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,712
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,801
of 205,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#30
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 205,940 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.