Computational tools for prioritizing candidate genes: Boosting disease gene discovery
Nature Reviews Genetics, ISSN: 1471-0056, Vol: 13, Issue: 8, Page: 523-536
2012
- 349Citations
- 838Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations349
- Citation Indexes349
- 349
- CrossRef342
- Captures838
- Readers838
- 811
- 27
Review Description
At different stages of any research project, molecular biologists need to choose-often somewhat arbitrarily, even after careful statistical data analysis-which genes or proteins to investigate further experimentally and which to leave out because of limited resources. Computational methods that integrate complex, heterogeneous data sets-such as expression data, sequence information, functional annotation and the biomedical literature-allow prioritizing genes for future study in a more informed way. Such methods can substantially increase the yield of downstream studies and are becoming invaluable to researchers. © 2012 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know