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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Comparison of Gene Region Simulation Methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0040925 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Audrey E. Hendricks, Josée Dupuis, Mayetri Gupta, Mark W. Logue, Kathryn L. Lunetta |
| Abstract |
Accurately modeling LD in simulations is essential to correctly evaluate new and existing association methods. At present, there has been minimal research comparing the quality of existing gene region simulation methods to produce LD structures similar to an existing gene region. Here we compare the ability of three approaches to accurately simulate the LD within a gene region: HapSim (2005), Hapgen (2009), and a minor extension to simple haplotype resampling. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 52% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 19% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,195,877
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#173,071
of 193,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,029
of 163,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,687
of 4,021 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 163,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,021 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.