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 |
Opportunities and Challenges for Molecular Understanding of Ciliopathies–The 100,000 Genomes Project
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2019.00127 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabrielle Wheway, Genomics England Research Consortium, Hannah M. Mitchison, J. C. Ambrose, E. L. Baple, M. Bleda, F. Boardman-Pretty, J. M. Boissiere, C. R. Boustred, M. J. Caulfield, G. C. Chan, C. E. H. Craig, L. C. Daugherty, Burca A. de, A. Devereau, G. Elgar, R. E. Foulger, T. Fowler, P. Furió-Tarí, J. M. Hackett, D. Halai, J. E. Holman, T. J. P. Hubbard, R. Jackson, D. Kasperaviciute, M. Kayikci, L. Lahnstein, K. Lawson, S. E. A. Leigh, I. U. S. Leong, F. J. Lopez, F. Maleady-Crowe, J. Mason, E. M. McDonagh, L. Moutsianas, M. Mueller, N. Murugaesu, A. C. Need, C. A. Odhams, C. Patch, D. Perez-Gil, D. Polychronopoulos, J. Pullinger, T. Rahim, A. Rendon, P. Riesgo-Ferreiro, T. Rogers, M. Ryten, K. Savage, K. Sawant, R. H. Scott, A. Siddiq, A. Sieghart, D. Smedley, K. R. Smith, A. Sosinsky, W. Spooner, H. E. Stevens, A. Stuckey, R. Sultana, E. R. A. Thomas, S. R. Thompson, C. Tregidgo, A. Tucci, E. Walsh, S. A. Watters, M. J. Welland, E. Williams, K. Witkowska, S. M. Wood, M. Zarowiecki |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 45% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 9% |
| Australia | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 64% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 131 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 18% |
| Researcher | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 38 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 52 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 2% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 43 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 January 2024.
All research outputs
#3,632,225
of 25,152,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,093
of 13,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,907
of 358,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#49
of 356 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,152,132 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,537 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 358,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 356 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.