↓ Skip to main content

Development and use of Ontologies Inside the Neuroscience Information Framework: A Practical Approach

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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.
Title
Development and use of Ontologies Inside the Neuroscience Information Framework: A Practical Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2012.00111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fahim T. Imam, Stephen D. Larson, Anita Bandrowski, Jeffery S. Grethe, Amarnath Gupta, Maryann E. Martone

Abstract

An initiative of the NIH Blueprint for neuroscience research, the Neuroscience Information Framework (NIF) project advances neuroscience by enabling discovery and access to public research data and tools worldwide through an open source, semantically enhanced search portal. One of the critical components for the overall NIF system, the NIF Standardized Ontologies (NIFSTD), provides an extensive collection of standard neuroscience concepts along with their synonyms and relationships. The knowledge models defined in the NIFSTD ontologies enable an effective concept-based search over heterogeneous types of web-accessible information entities in NIF's production system. NIFSTD covers major domains in neuroscience, including diseases, brain anatomy, cell types, sub-cellular anatomy, small molecules, techniques, and resource descriptors. Since the first production release in 2008, NIF has grown significantly in content and functionality, particularly with respect to the ontologies and ontology-based services that drive the NIF system. We present here on the structure, design principles, community engagement, and the current state of NIFSTD ontologies.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

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 States 4 7%
Brazil 2 3%
Mexico 1 2%
Finland 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Russia 1 2%
Unknown 50 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Professor 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 17 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 5 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 September 2012.
All research outputs
#7,084,217
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#2,210
of 11,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,377
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#69
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,737 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.