↓ Skip to main content

Non-coding RNAs in Complex Diseases

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 2: Systematic Identification of Non-coding RNAs
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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.
Chapter title
Systematic Identification of Non-coding RNAs
Chapter number 2
Book title
Non-coding RNAs in Complex Diseases
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-0719-5_2
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-130718-8, 978-9-81-130719-5
Authors

Yun Xiao, Jing Hu, Wenkang Yin, Xiao, Yun, Hu, Jing, Yin, Wenkang

Abstract

Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are biologically significant in variable ways. They modulate gene expression at the levels of transcription and post-transcription. MiRNAs and lncRNAs are two major classes of non-coding RNAs and have been extensively characterized. They are implicated in various biological processes and diseases. Thus, identification of miRNAs and lncRNAs are fundamental to further understand their roles and dissect their mechanisms. Here, we overviewed pipelines of identifying miRNAs and lncRNAs based on next-generation sequencing technologies. We applied the pipelines to identify miRNAs in multiple cell lines and perform expression quantification of mature, precursor and primary miRNAs. In addition, we provided an alternative way to re-annotate lncRNAs from microarray data. We summarized multiple resources and databases for lncRNA annotation and compared their annotation processes and specific parameters. Finally, we utilized RNA-seq and miRNA-seq data to construct a comprehensive transcriptome containing miRNAs, lncRNAs and protein-coding genes in heart failure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 25%
Unspecified 1 8%
Materials Science 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,545,423
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,528
of 4,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,603
of 336,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#43
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 336,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.