↓ Skip to main content

Multi-omic network signatures of disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Multi-omic network signatures of disease
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2013.00309
Pubmed ID
Authors

David L. Gibbs, Lisa Gralinski, Ralph S. Baric, Shannon K. McWeeney

Abstract

To better understand dynamic disease processes, integrated multi-omic methods are needed, yet comparing different types of omic data remains difficult. Integrative solutions benefit experimenters by eliminating potential biases that come with single omic analysis. We have developed the methods needed to explore whether a relationship exists between co-expression network models built from transcriptomic and proteomic data types, and whether this relationship can be used to improve the disease signature discovery process. A naïve, correlation based method is utilized for comparison. Using publicly available infectious disease time series data, we analyzed the related co-expression structure of the transcriptome and proteome in response to SARS-CoV infection in mice. Transcript and peptide expression data was filtered using quality scores and subset by taking the intersection on mapped Entrez IDs. Using this data set, independent co-expression networks were built. The networks were integrated by constructing a bipartite module graph based on module member overlap, module summary correlation, and correlation to phenotypes of interest. Compared to the module level results, the naïve approach is hindered by a lack of correlation across data types, less significant enrichment results, and little functional overlap across data types. Our module graph approach avoids these problems, resulting in an integrated omic signature of disease progression, which allows prioritization across data types for down-stream experiment planning. Integrated modules exhibited related functional enrichments and could suggest novel interactions in response to infection. These disease and platform-independent methods can be used to realize the full potential of multi-omic network signatures. The data (experiment SM001) are publically available through the NIAID Systems Virology (https://www.systemsvirology.org) and PNNL (http://omics.pnl.gov) web portals. Phenotype data is found in the supplementary information. The ProCoNA package is available as part of Bioconductor 2.13.

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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 108 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 24%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 14%
Computer Science 7 6%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 18 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 11 January 2014.
All research outputs
#15,176,372
of 25,392,205 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#3,702
of 13,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,039
of 312,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#26
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 312,952 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 51% of its contemporaries.