↓ Skip to main content

When One and One Gives More than Two: Challenges and Opportunities of Integrative Omics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
When One and One Gives More than Two: Challenges and Opportunities of Integrative Omics
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2011.00105
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hyungwon Choi, Norman Pavelka

Abstract

Since the dawn of the post-genomic era a myriad of novel high-throughput technologies have been developed that are capable of measuring thousands of biological molecules at once, giving rise to various "omics" platforms. These advances offer the unique opportunity to study how individual parts of a biological system work together to produce emerging phenotypes. Today, many research laboratories are moving toward applying multiple omics platforms to analyze the same biological samples. In addition, network information of interacting molecules is being incorporated more and more into the analysis and interpretation of these multiple omics datasets, which provides novel ways to integrate multiple layers of heterogeneous biological information into a single coherent picture. Here, we provide a perspective on how such recent "integrative omics" efforts are likely going to shift biological paradigms once again, and what challenges lie ahead.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
United Kingdom 3 3%
Mexico 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 93 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 22%
Student > Master 14 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 9%
Professor 7 7%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 11 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 10%
Computer Science 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 17 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 March 2012.
All research outputs
#14,732,278
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#4,429
of 11,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,230
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#133
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,737 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.