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 |
Accessible High-Throughput Virtual Screening Molecular Docking Software for Students and Educators
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002499 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Reed B. Jacob, Tim Andersen, Owen M. McDougal |
| Abstract |
We survey low cost high-throughput virtual screening (HTVS) computer programs for instructors who wish to demonstrate molecular docking in their courses. Since HTVS programs are a useful adjunct to the time consuming and expensive wet bench experiments necessary to discover new drug therapies, the topic of molecular docking is core to the instruction of biochemistry and molecular biology. The availability of HTVS programs coupled with decreasing costs and advances in computer hardware have made computational approaches to drug discovery possible at institutional and non-profit budgets. This paper focuses on HTVS programs with graphical user interfaces (GUIs) that use either DOCK or AutoDock for the prediction of DockoMatic, PyRx, DockingServer, and MOLA since their utility has been proven by the research community, they are free or affordable, and the programs operate on a range of computer platforms. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Belgium | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 1% |
| Unknown | 258 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 19% |
| Researcher | 47 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 36 | 13% |
| Unknown | 61 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 69 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 49 | 18% |
| Chemistry | 36 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 23 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 23 | 8% |
| Unknown | 64 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 June 2012.
All research outputs
#16,721,956
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#7,233
of 9,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,109
of 179,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#86
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 179,337 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.