↓ Skip to main content

f-scLVM: scalable and versatile factor analysis for single-cell RNA-seq

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
78 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
115 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
f-scLVM: scalable and versatile factor analysis for single-cell RNA-seq
Published in
Genome Biology, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13059-017-1334-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florian Buettner, Naruemon Pratanwanich, Davis J. McCarthy, John C. Marioni, Oliver Stegle

Abstract

Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) allows studying heterogeneity in gene expression in large cell populations. Such heterogeneity can arise due to technical or biological factors, making decomposing sources of variation difficult. We here describe f-scLVM (factorial single-cell latent variable model), a method based on factor analysis that uses pathway annotations to guide the inference of interpretable factors underpinning the heterogeneity. Our model jointly estimates the relevance of individual factors, refines gene set annotations, and infers factors without annotation. In applications to multiple scRNA-seq datasets, we find that f-scLVM robustly decomposes scRNA-seq datasets into interpretable components, thereby facilitating the identification of novel subpopulations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 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 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 242 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 26%
Researcher 45 19%
Student > Master 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 3%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 52 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 62 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 18%
Computer Science 38 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 3%
Mathematics 8 3%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 57 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 24 February 2023.
All research outputs
#807,731
of 25,793,330 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#530
of 4,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,788
of 344,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#14
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,793,330 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 344,083 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 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.