↓ Skip to main content

Long Non-coding RNAs in Endothelial Biology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Long Non-coding RNAs in Endothelial Biology
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00522
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tyler Weirick, Giuseppe Militello, Shizuka Uchida

Abstract

In recent years, the role of RNA has expanded to the extent that protein-coding RNAs are now the minority with a variety of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) now comprising the majority of RNAs in higher organisms. A major contributor to this shift in understanding is RNA sequencing (RNA-seq), which allows a largely unconstrained method for monitoring the status of RNA from whole organisms down to a single cell. This observational power presents both challenges and new opportunities, which require specialized bioinformatics tools to extract knowledge from the data and the ability to reuse data for multiple studies. In this review, we summarize the current status of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) research in endothelial biology. Then, we will cover computational methods for identifying, annotating, and characterizing lncRNAs in the heart, especially endothelial cells.

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 4 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 33%
Student > Master 6 22%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Professor 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,347,193
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#5,286
of 13,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,068
of 326,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#202
of 474 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 326,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 474 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.