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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
BESST - Efficient scaffolding of large fragmented assemblies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-15-281 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristoffer Sahlin, Francesco Vezzi, Björn Nystedt, Joakim Lundeberg, Lars Arvestad |
| Abstract |
The use of short reads from High Throughput Sequencing (HTS) techniques is now commonplace in de novo assembly. Yet, obtaining contiguous assemblies from short reads is challenging, thus making scaffolding an important step in the assembly pipeline. Different algorithms have been proposed but many of them use the number of read pairs supporting a linking of two contigs as an indicator of reliability. This reasoning is intuitive, but fails to account for variation in link count due to contig features.We have also noted that published scaffolders are only evaluated on small datasets using output from only one assembler. Two issues arise from this. Firstly, some of the available tools are not well suited for complex genomes. Secondly, these evaluations provide little support for inferring a software's general performance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 12% |
| Sweden | 3 | 9% |
| India | 2 | 6% |
| Germany | 2 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 20 | 59% |
| Members of the public | 13 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Germany | 3 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Vietnam | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 143 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 51 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 88 | 56% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 28 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 25 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,227,654
of 25,773,273 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#120
of 7,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,836
of 243,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#2
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,773,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 243,993 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 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 98% of its contemporaries.