↓ Skip to main content

Biomedical Discovery Acceleration, with Applications to Craniofacial Development

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, March 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
citeulike
14 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Biomedical Discovery Acceleration, with Applications to Craniofacial Development
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, March 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000215
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonia M. Leach, Hannah Tipney, Weiguo Feng, William A. Baumgartner, Priyanka Kasliwal, Ronald P. Schuyler, Trevor Williams, Richard A. Spritz, Lawrence Hunter

Abstract

The profusion of high-throughput instruments and the explosion of new results in the scientific literature, particularly in molecular biomedicine, is both a blessing and a curse to the bench researcher. Even knowledgeable and experienced scientists can benefit from computational tools that help navigate this vast and rapidly evolving terrain. In this paper, we describe a novel computational approach to this challenge, a knowledge-based system that combines reading, reasoning, and reporting methods to facilitate analysis of experimental data. Reading methods extract information from external resources, either by parsing structured data or using biomedical language processing to extract information from unstructured data, and track knowledge provenance. Reasoning methods enrich the knowledge that results from reading by, for example, noting two genes that are annotated to the same ontology term or database entry. Reasoning is also used to combine all sources into a knowledge network that represents the integration of all sorts of relationships between a pair of genes, and to calculate a combined reliability score. Reporting methods combine the knowledge network with a congruent network constructed from experimental data and visualize the combined network in a tool that facilitates the knowledge-based analysis of that data. An implementation of this approach, called the Hanalyzer, is demonstrated on a large-scale gene expression array dataset relevant to craniofacial development. The use of the tool was critical in the creation of hypotheses regarding the roles of four genes never previously characterized as involved in craniofacial development; each of these hypotheses was validated by further experimental work.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 12%
Brazil 2 2%
Spain 2 2%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 91 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 26%
Researcher 24 21%
Student > Master 11 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Professor 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 10 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 27%
Computer Science 30 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 12%
Engineering 4 4%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 17 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 April 2010.
All research outputs
#4,259,416
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#3,507
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,586
of 107,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#16
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 107,340 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 68% of its contemporaries.