↓ Skip to main content

BioVenn – a web application for the comparison and visualization of biological lists using area-proportional Venn diagrams

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
521 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
436 Mendeley
citeulike
32 CiteULike
connotea
4 Connotea
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
BioVenn – a web application for the comparison and visualization of biological lists using area-proportional Venn diagrams
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-9-488
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Hulsen, Jacob de Vlieg, Wynand Alkema

Abstract

In many genomics projects, numerous lists containing biological identifiers are produced. Often it is useful to see the overlap between different lists, enabling researchers to quickly observe similarities and differences between the data sets they are analyzing. One of the most popular methods to visualize the overlap and differences between data sets is the Venn diagram: a diagram consisting of two or more circles in which each circle corresponds to a data set, and the overlap between the circles corresponds to the overlap between the data sets. Venn diagrams are especially useful when they are 'area-proportional' i.e. the sizes of the circles and the overlaps correspond to the sizes of the data sets. Currently there are no programs available that can create area-proportional Venn diagrams connected to a wide range of biological databases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 436 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 3%
Germany 6 1%
United Kingdom 5 1%
China 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Other 9 2%
Unknown 391 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 131 30%
Researcher 91 21%
Student > Master 56 13%
Unspecified 37 8%
Student > Bachelor 35 8%
Other 86 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 224 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 74 17%
Unspecified 54 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 6%
Computer Science 13 3%
Other 45 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#2,120,568
of 9,361,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,543
of 6,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,598
of 199,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#55
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,361,690 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,397 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 199,467 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 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 73% of its contemporaries.