↓ Skip to main content

DGIdb: mining the druggable genome.

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Methods, October 2013
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
48 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
195 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
372 Mendeley
citeulike
16 CiteULike
Title
DGIdb: mining the druggable genome.
Published in
Nature Methods, October 2013
DOI 10.1038/nmeth.2689
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malachi Griffith, Obi L Griffith, Adam C Coffman, James V Weible, Josh F McMichael, Nicholas C Spies, James Koval, Indraniel Das, Matthew B Callaway, James M Eldred, Christopher A Miller, Janakiraman Subramanian, Ramaswamy Govindan, Runjun D Kumar, Ron Bose, Li Ding, Jason R Walker, David E Larson, David J Dooling, Scott M Smith, Timothy J Ley, Elaine R Mardis, Richard K Wilson, Griffith M, Griffith OL, Coffman AC, Weible JV, McMichael JF, Spies NC, Koval J, Das I, Callaway MB, Eldred JM, Miller CA, Subramanian J, Govindan R, Kumar RD, Bose R, Ding L, Walker JR, Larson DE, Dooling DJ, Smith SM, Ley TJ, Mardis ER, Wilson RK, Obi L. Griffith, Adam C. Coffman, James V. Weible, Josh F. McMichael, Nicholas C. Spies, Matthew B. Callaway, James M. Eldred, Christopher A. Miller, Runjun D. Kumar, Jason R. Walker, David E. Larson, David J. Dooling, Scott M. Smith, Timothy J. Ley, Elaine R. Mardis, Richard K. Wilson

Abstract

The Drug-Gene Interaction database (DGIdb) mines existing resources that generate hypotheses about how mutated genes might be targeted therapeutically or prioritized for drug development. It provides an interface for searching lists of genes against a compendium of drug-gene interactions and potentially 'druggable' genes. DGIdb can be accessed at http://dgidb.org/.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 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 372 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 17 5%
Germany 4 1%
Spain 4 1%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 326 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 116 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 101 27%
Student > Bachelor 30 8%
Student > Master 27 7%
Other 23 6%
Other 75 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 172 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 68 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 11%
Computer Science 23 6%
Unspecified 22 6%
Other 47 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 102. 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 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#122,210
of 11,824,577 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#169
of 3,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,724
of 157,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#8
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,824,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 157,037 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.