↓ Skip to main content

Building the Future of Bioinformatics through Student-Facilitated Conferencing

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, January 2014
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Building the Future of Bioinformatics through Student-Facilitated Conferencing
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, January 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003458
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kavisha Ramdayal, Miranda D. Stobbe, Tarun Mishra, Magali Michaut

Abstract

Sharing results, techniques, and challenges is paramount to advance our understanding of any field of science. In the scientific community this exchange of ideas is mainly made possible through national and international conferences. Scientists have the opportunity to showcase their work, receive feedback, and improve their presentation skills. However, conferences can be large and intimidating for young researchers. In addition, for many of the more prestigious conferences, the very high number of submissions and low selection rate are major limitations to aspiring young researchers aiming to present their work to the scientific community. To improve student participation and proliferation of information, regional student groups have successfully organized conferences and symposia specifically aimed at students. This gives more students the opportunity to present their work and receive valuable experience and insight from peers and leaders in the field. At the same time, it is an ideal way for students to gain familiarity with the conference experience. In this paper, we highlight some of the benefits of participating in such student conferences, and we review the challenges we have encountered when organizing them. Both topics are illustrated in detail with examples from different ISCB Student Council Regional Student Groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 8%
Japan 1 4%
Sweden 1 4%
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 21 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Master 3 12%
Lecturer 2 8%
Professor 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 15%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Computer Science 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#2,310,307
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#2,085
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,295
of 322,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#22
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 322,827 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 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.