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 |
Dynamic evolution of clonal epialleles revealed by methclone
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-014-0472-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sheng Li, Francine Garrett-Bakelman, Alexander E Perl, Selina M Luger, Chao Zhang, Bik L To, Ian D Lewis, Anna L Brown, Richard J D’Andrea, M Elizabeth Ross, Ross Levine, Martin Carroll, Ari Melnick, Christopher E Mason |
| Abstract |
We describe methclone, a novel method to identify epigenetic loci that harbor large changes in the clonality of their epialleles (epigenetic alleles). Methclone efficiently analyzes genome-wide DNA methylation sequencing data. We quantify the changes using a composition entropy difference calculation and also introduce a new measure of global clonality shift, loci with epiallele shift per million loci covered, which enables comparisons between different samples to gauge overall epiallelic dynamics. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of methclone in capturing functional epiallele shifts in leukemia patients from diagnosis to relapse. Methclone is open-source and freely available at https://code.google.com/p/methclone. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 121 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 36% |
| Researcher | 26 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 36 | 28% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 11 June 2020.
All research outputs
#4,369,647
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,690
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,389
of 263,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#49
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 263,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.