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 |
A novel independence test for somatic alterations in cancer shows that biology drives mutual exclusivity but chance explains most co-occurrence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-016-1114-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sander Canisius, John W. M. Martens, Lodewyk F. A. Wessels |
| Abstract |
In cancer, mutually exclusive or co-occurring somatic alterations across genes can suggest functional interactions. Existing tests for such patterns make the unrealistic assumption of identical gene alteration probabilities across tumors. We present Discrete Independence Statistic Controlling for Observations with Varying Event Rates (DISCOVER), a novel test that is more sensitive than other methods and controls its false positive rate. A pan-cancer analysis using DISCOVER finds no evidence for widespread co-occurrence, and most co-occurrences previously detected do not exceed expectation by chance. Many mutual exclusivities are identified involving well-known genes related to cell cycle and growth factor signaling, as well as lesser known regulators of Hedgehog signaling. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 7% |
| France | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 9 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 163 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 23% |
| Researcher | 36 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 13% |
| Unknown | 35 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 47 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 18 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 10% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 45 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 25 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,827,320
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,514
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,787
of 421,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#32
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 421,376 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 52% of its contemporaries.