Genetic Epidemiology
Springer New York
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 |
Quality Control of Common and Rare Variants
|
|---|---|
| Book title |
Genetic Epidemiology
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-7868-7_3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-7867-0, 978-1-4939-7868-7
|
| Authors |
Kalliope Panoutsopoulou, Klaudia Walter |
| Abstract |
Thorough data quality control (QC) is a key step to the success of high-throughput genotyping approaches. Following extensive research several criteria and thresholds have been established for data QC at the sample and variant level. Sample QC is aimed at the identification and removal (when appropriate) of individuals with (1) low call rate, (2) discrepant sex or other identity-related information, (3) excess genome-wide heterozygosity and homozygosity, (4) relations to other samples, (5) ethnicity differences, (6) batch effects, and (7) contamination. Variant QC is aimed at identification and removal or refinement of variants with (1) low call rate, (2) call rate differences by phenotypic status, (3) gross deviation from Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE), (4) bad genotype intensity plots, (5) batch effects, (6) differences in allele frequencies with published data sets, (7) very low minor allele counts (MAC), (8) low imputation quality score, (9) low variant quality score log-odds, and (10) few or low quality reads. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 22% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 43% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,535,385
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,410
of 13,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,124
of 442,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#596
of 1,499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,206 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 442,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,499 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.