↓ Skip to main content

SBR-Blood: systems biology repository for hematopoietic cells

Overview of attention for article published in Nucleic Acids Research, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
SBR-Blood: systems biology repository for hematopoietic cells
Published in
Nucleic Acids Research, November 2015
DOI 10.1093/nar/gkv1263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Lichtenberg, Elisabeth F. Heuston, Tejaswini Mishra, Cheryl A. Keller, Ross C. Hardison, David M. Bodine

Abstract

Extensive research into hematopoiesis (the development of blood cells) over several decades has generated large sets of expression and epigenetic profiles in multiple human and mouse blood cell types. However, there is no single location to analyze how gene regulatory processes lead to different mature blood cells. We have developed a new database framework called hematopoietic Systems Biology Repository (SBR-Blood), available online at http://sbrblood.nhgri.nih.gov, which allows user-initiated analyses for cell type correlations or gene-specific behavior during differentiation using publicly available datasets for array- and sequencing-based platforms from mouse hematopoietic cells. SBR-Blood organizes information by both cell identity and by hematopoietic lineage. The validity and usability of SBR-Blood has been established through the reproduction of workflows relevant to expression data, DNA methylation, histone modifications and transcription factor occupancy profiles.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 8%
United States 1 8%
Unknown 11 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Bachelor 3 23%
Researcher 2 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 15%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 31%
Engineering 2 15%
Computer Science 2 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Other 3 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#7,119,734
of 13,796,475 outputs
Outputs from Nucleic Acids Research
#15,848
of 21,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,041
of 358,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nucleic Acids Research
#202
of 364 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,796,475 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 358,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 364 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.