↓ Skip to main content

Answering biological questions: querying a systems biology database for nutrigenomics

Overview of attention for article published in Genes & Nutrition, October 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 159)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Answering biological questions: querying a systems biology database for nutrigenomics
Published in
Genes & Nutrition, October 2010
DOI 10.1007/s12263-010-0190-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chris T. Evelo, Kees van Bochove, Jahn-Takeshi Saito

Abstract

The requirement of systems biology for connecting different levels of biological research leads directly to a need for integrating vast amounts of diverse information in general and of omics data in particular. The nutritional phenotype database addresses this challenge for nutrigenomics. A particularly urgent objective in coping with the data avalanche is making biologically meaningful information accessible to the researcher. This contribution describes how we intend to meet this objective with the nutritional phenotype database. We outline relevant parts of the system architecture, describe the kinds of data managed by it, and show how the system can support retrieval of biologically meaningful information by means of ontologies, full-text queries, and structured queries. Our contribution points out critical points, describes several technical hurdles. It demonstrates how pathway analysis can improve queries and comparisons for nutrition studies. Finally, three directions for future research are given.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 3 9%
Brazil 1 3%
Indonesia 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Mexico 1 3%
Argentina 1 3%
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 24 73%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Other 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 10 30%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 58%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 April 2010.
All research outputs
#1,401,856
of 3,633,617 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Nutrition
#46
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,216
of 55,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Nutrition
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,633,617 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 60th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 159 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 55,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.