Title |
Orchestrating high-throughput genomic analysis with Bioconductor
|
---|---|
Published in |
Nature Methods, January 2015
|
DOI | 10.1038/nmeth.3252 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Wolfgang Huber, Vincent J Carey, Robert Gentleman, Simon Anders, Marc Carlson, Benilton S Carvalho, Hector Corrada Bravo, Sean Davis, Laurent Gatto, Thomas Girke, Raphael Gottardo, Florian Hahne, Kasper D Hansen, Rafael A Irizarry, Michael Lawrence, Michael I Love, James MacDonald, Valerie Obenchain, Andrzej K Oleś, Hervé Pagès, Alejandro Reyes, Paul Shannon, Gordon K Smyth, Dan Tenenbaum, Levi Waldron, Martin Morgan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 179 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 | 51 | 28% |
United Kingdom | 12 | 7% |
Australia | 10 | 6% |
Germany | 8 | 4% |
Canada | 8 | 4% |
Spain | 4 | 2% |
Netherlands | 4 | 2% |
Sweden | 4 | 2% |
Switzerland | 4 | 2% |
Other | 25 | 14% |
Unknown | 49 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 110 | 61% |
Members of the public | 67 | 37% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | <1% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,433 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 22 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 13 | <1% |
Germany | 12 | <1% |
Spain | 10 | <1% |
Netherlands | 9 | <1% |
Brazil | 4 | <1% |
Denmark | 4 | <1% |
Italy | 3 | <1% |
Mexico | 3 | <1% |
Other | 34 | 1% |
Unknown | 2319 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 601 | 25% |
Researcher | 492 | 20% |
Student > Master | 291 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 208 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 131 | 5% |
Other | 344 | 14% |
Unknown | 366 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 717 | 29% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 658 | 27% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 145 | 6% |
Computer Science | 110 | 5% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 82 | 3% |
Other | 273 | 11% |
Unknown | 448 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 167. 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 02 April 2024.
All research outputs
#250,282
of 25,859,234 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#235
of 5,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,863
of 363,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#2
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,859,234 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 5,423 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 363,599 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 85 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 97% of its contemporaries.