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 |
SNES: single nucleus exome sequencing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genome Biology, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13059-015-0616-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco L Leung, Yong Wang, Jill Waters, Nicholas E Navin |
| Abstract |
Single-cell genome sequencing methods are challenged by poor physical coverage and high error rates, making it difficult to distinguish real biological variants from technical artifacts. To address this problem, we developed a method called SNES that combines flow-sorting of single G1/0 or G2/M nuclei, time-limited multiple-displacement-amplification, exome capture, and next-generation sequencing to generate high coverage (96%) data from single human cells. We validated our method in a fibroblast cell line, and show low allelic dropout and false-positive error rates, resulting in high detection efficiencies for single nucleotide variants (92%) and indels (85%) in single cells. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 | 10 | 33% |
| India | 3 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 10% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 16 | 53% |
| Members of the public | 13 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 170 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 27% |
| Researcher | 44 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 66 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 51 | 28% |
| Computer Science | 10 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 7% |
| Unknown | 25 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 28 August 2015.
All research outputs
#1,956,208
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#1,638
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,805
of 277,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#26
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 277,727 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 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 60% of its contemporaries.