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 |
The Eukaryotic Promoter Database: expansion of EPDnew and new promoter analysis tools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nucleic Acids Research, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1093/nar/gku1111 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
René Dreos, Giovanna Ambrosini, Rouayda Cavin Périer, Philipp Bucher |
| Abstract |
We present an update of EPDNew (http://epd.vital-it.ch), a recently introduced new part of the Eukaryotic Promoter Database (EPD) which has been described in more detail in a previous NAR Database Issue. EPD is an old database of experimentally characterized eukaryotic POL II promoters, which are conceptually defined as transcription initiation sites or regions. EPDnew is a collection of automatically compiled, organism-specific promoter lists complementing the old corpus of manually compiled promoter entries of EPD. This new part is exclusively derived from next generation sequencing data from high-throughput promoter mapping experiments. We report on the recent growth of EPDnew, its extension to additional model organisms and its improved integration with other bioinformatics resources developed by our group, in particular the Signal Search Analysis and ChIP-Seq web servers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 161 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Researcher | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 35 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 65 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Unknown | 42 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 November 2014.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Nucleic Acids Research
#22,489
of 27,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,880
of 276,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nucleic Acids Research
#279
of 420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 276,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 420 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.