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 |
Dinucleotide controlled null models for comparative RNA gene prediction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-9-248 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tanja Gesell, Stefan Washietl |
| Abstract |
Comparative prediction of RNA structures can be used to identify functional noncoding RNAs in genomic screens. It was shown recently by Babak et al. [BMC Bioinformatics. 8:33] that RNA gene prediction programs can be biased by the genomic dinucleotide content, in particular those programs using a thermodynamic folding model including stacking energies. As a consequence, there is need for dinucleotide-preserving control strategies to assess the significance of such predictions. While there have been randomization algorithms for single sequences for many years, the problem has remained challenging for multiple alignments and there is currently no algorithm available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 25% |
| France | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 33% |
| Researcher | 13 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
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 24 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,931,785
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,825
of 7,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,897
of 84,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#37
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 84,809 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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.