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 |
Integrative structural modeling with small angle X-ray scattering profiles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6807-12-17 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dina Schneidman-Duhovny, Seung Joong Kim, Andrej Sali |
| Abstract |
Recent technological advances enabled high-throughput collection of Small Angle X-ray Scattering (SAXS) profiles of biological macromolecules. Thus, computational methods for integrating SAXS profiles into structural modeling are needed more than ever. Here, we review specifically the use of SAXS profiles for the structural modeling of proteins, nucleic acids, and their complexes. First, the approaches for computing theoretical SAXS profiles from structures are presented. Second, computational methods for predicting protein structures, dynamics of proteins in solution, and assembly structures are covered. Third, we discuss the use of SAXS profiles in integrative structure modeling approaches that depend simultaneously on several data types. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 161 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 52 | 30% |
| Researcher | 40 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Professor | 12 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 60 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 16% |
| Chemistry | 27 | 16% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 15 | 9% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 25 | 14% |
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 20 July 2012.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#896
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,650
of 177,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 177,875 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.