| Title |
Human knockouts and phenotypic analysis in a cohort with a high rate of consanguinity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature22034 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Danish Saleheen, Pradeep Natarajan, Irina M. Armean, Wei Zhao, Asif Rasheed, Sumeet A. Khetarpal, Hong-Hee Won, Konrad J. Karczewski, Anne H. O’Donnell-Luria, Kaitlin E. Samocha, Benjamin Weisburd, Namrata Gupta, Mozzam Zaidi, Maria Samuel, Atif Imran, Shahid Abbas, Faisal Majeed, Madiha Ishaq, Saba Akhtar, Kevin Trindade, Megan Mucksavage, Nadeem Qamar, Khan Shah Zaman, Zia Yaqoob, Tahir Saghir, Syed Nadeem Hasan Rizvi, Anis Memon, Nadeem Hayyat Mallick, Mohammad Ishaq, Syed Zahed Rasheed, Fazal-ur-Rehman Memon, Khalid Mahmood, Naveeduddin Ahmed, Ron Do, Ronald M. Krauss, Daniel G. MacArthur, Stacey Gabriel, Eric S. Lander, Mark J. Daly, Philippe Frossard, John Danesh, Daniel J. Rader, Sekar Kathiresan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 579 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 States | 187 | 32% |
| United Kingdom | 41 | 7% |
| Canada | 22 | 4% |
| France | 15 | 3% |
| India | 10 | 2% |
| Japan | 10 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 9 | 2% |
| Australia | 8 | 1% |
| Germany | 8 | 1% |
| Other | 69 | 12% |
| Unknown | 200 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 299 | 52% |
| Scientists | 255 | 44% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 7 | 1% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 492 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 484 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 135 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 88 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 43 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 5% |
| Other | 88 | 18% |
| Unknown | 79 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 150 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 111 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 74 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 44 | 9% |
| Unknown | 94 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 535. 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 15 May 2024.
All research outputs
#47,574
of 25,930,295 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#3,959
of 99,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#971
of 327,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#83
of 880 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,930,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 327,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 880 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.