↓ Skip to main content

A comprehensive study of small non-frameshift insertions/deletions in proteins and prediction of their phenotypic effects by a machine learning method (KD4i)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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
A comprehensive study of small non-frameshift insertions/deletions in proteins and prediction of their phenotypic effects by a machine learning method (KD4i)
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-15-111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Bermejo-Das-Neves, Hoan-Ngoc Nguyen, Olivier Poch, Julie D Thompson

Abstract

Small insertion and deletion polymorphisms (Indels) are the second most common mutations in the human genome, after Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs). Recent studies have shown that they have significant influence on genetic variation by altering human traits and can cause multiple human diseases. In particular, many Indels that occur in protein coding regions are known to impact the structure or function of the protein. A major challenge is to predict the effects of these Indels and to distinguish between deleterious and neutral variants. When an Indel occurs within a coding region, it can be either frameshifting (FS) or non-frameshifting (NFS). FS-Indels either modify the complete C-terminal region of the protein or result in premature termination of translation. NFS-Indels insert/delete multiples of three nucleotides leading to the insertion/deletion of one or more amino acids.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 24%
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 29%
Computer Science 8 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 April 2014.
All research outputs
#18,370,767
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,302
of 7,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,306
of 226,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#99
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,269 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 226,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.