| Title |
BCL11A enhancer dissection by Cas9-mediated in situ saturating mutagenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature15521 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew C. Canver, Elenoe C. Smith, Falak Sher, Luca Pinello, Neville E. Sanjana, Ophir Shalem, Diane D. Chen, Patrick G. Schupp, Divya S. Vinjamur, Sara P. Garcia, Sidinh Luc, Ryo Kurita, Yukio Nakamura, Yuko Fujiwara, Takahiro Maeda, Guo-Cheng Yuan, Feng Zhang, Stuart H. Orkin, Daniel E. Bauer |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 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 | 43 | 45% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 6% |
| Japan | 3 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| China | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 28 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 47 | 49% |
| Scientists | 44 | 46% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,099 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| Austria | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1077 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 250 | 23% |
| Researcher | 223 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 117 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 100 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 44 | 4% |
| Other | 159 | 14% |
| Unknown | 206 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 350 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 325 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 30 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 23 | 2% |
| Other | 82 | 7% |
| Unknown | 222 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 231. 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 05 March 2024.
All research outputs
#167,262
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#10,347
of 99,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,943
of 271,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#238
of 1,006 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 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 99,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 271,677 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 1,006 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.