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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Chapter title |
Simplifying the proteome: analytical strategies for improving peak capacity.
|
---|---|
Chapter number | 3 |
Book title |
Advancements of Mass Spectrometry in Biomedical Research
|
Published in |
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, June 2014
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-06068-2_3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Book ISBNs |
978-3-31-906067-5, 978-3-31-906068-2
|
Authors |
Gethings LA, Connolly JB, Lee A. Gethings, Joanne B. Connolly |
Abstract |
The diversity of biological samples and dynamic range of analytes being analyzed can prove to be an analytical challenge and is particularly prevalent to proteomic studies. Maximizing the peak capacity of the workflow employed can extend the dynamic range and increase identification rates. The focus of this chapter is to present means of achieving this for various analytical techniques such as liquid chromatography, mass spectrometry, and ion mobility. A combination of these methods can be used as part of a data-independent acquisition strategy, thereby limiting issues such as chimericy when analyzing regions of extreme analyte density. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 38% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 13% |
Researcher | 1 | 13% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 38% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 13% |
Chemistry | 1 | 13% |
Computer Science | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2014.
All research outputs
#17,728,060
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,087
of 4,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,702
of 228,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#22
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 228,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.