↓ Skip to main content

Role of clinical bioinformatics in the development of network-based Biomarkers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
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
Role of clinical bioinformatics in the development of network-based Biomarkers
Published in
Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/2043-9113-1-28
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiangdong Wang

Abstract

Network biomarker as a new type of biomarkers with protein-protein interactions was initiated and investigated with the integration of knowledge on protein annotations, interaction, and signaling pathway. A number of methodologies and computational programs have been developed to integrate selected proteins into the knowledge-based networks via the combination of genomics, proteomics and bioinformatics. Alterations of network biomarkers can be monitored and evaluated at different stages and time points during the development of diseases, named dynamic network biomarkers. Dynamic network biomarkers should be furthermore correlated with clinical informatics, including patient complaints, history, therapies, clinical symptoms and signs, physician's examinations, biochemical analyses, imaging profiles, pathologies and other measurements.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 53 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 19%
Computer Science 9 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 15 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 30 November 2011.
All research outputs
#5,404,723
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics
#8
of 61 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,489
of 152,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 61 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 152,378 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.