↓ Skip to main content

Extending the R Library PROPER to Enable Power Calculations for Isoform-Level Analysis with EBSeq

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
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
Extending the R Library PROPER to Enable Power Calculations for Isoform-Level Analysis with EBSeq
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2016.00225
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amadou Gaye

Abstract

RNA-Sequencing (RNA-Seq) has become a routine technology for investigating gene expression differences in comparative transcriptomic studies. Differential expression (DE) analysis of the isoforms of genes is just emerging now that expression (read counts) can be estimated with higher accuracy at the isoform level. Estimating the statistical power that can be achieved with a specific number of repeats is a key step in RNA-Seq analysis. The R library proper was developed to provide realistic empirical power analysis. However, proper uses differential expression methods more suited for power calculation of gene-level expression data. We propose extensions to this tool that would allow for power analysis which takes into account the specificities of isoforms expression. This was achieved by enabling the use of EBSeq, a DE approach well-tailored for isoform-level expression, as an additional analysis method within PROPER. The new extensions and exemplar code for their usage are freely available online at: https://github.com/agaye/proper_extension.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 8%
Unknown 12 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 38%
Researcher 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 31%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 15%
Unknown 2 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,325,425
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,006
of 12,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,592
of 424,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#8
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 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 12,604 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 424,465 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.