↓ Skip to main content

Single Cell Biomedicine

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Single Cell Biomedicine'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Can the Single Cell Make Biomedicine Different?
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Automated Single-Cell Analysis and Isolation System: A Paradigm Shift in Cell Screening Methods for Bio-medicines
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Single-Cell Non-coding RNA in Embryonic Development
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 High Throughput Single Cell RNA Sequencing, Bioinformatics Analysis and Applications
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Circulating Tumor Cells: The Importance of Single Cell Analysis
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Super-Resolution Fluorescence Microscopy for Single Cell Imaging
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Single Cell Proteomics for Molecular Targets in Lung Cancer: High-Dimensional Data Acquisition and Analysis
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Therapeutic Antibody Discovery in Infectious Diseases Using Single-Cell Analysis
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Single Cell Genetics and Epigenetics in Early Embryo: From Oocyte to Blastocyst
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 The Potential Roles and Advantages of Single Cell Sequencing in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hematological Malignancies
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Application of Single Cell Sequencing in Cancer
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Emergence of Bias During the Synthesis and Amplification of cDNA for scRNA-seq
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Detection and Application of RNA Editing in Cancer
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Is Pooled CRISPR-Screening the Dawn of a New Era for Functional Genomics
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Roles of Single Cell Systems Biomedicine in Lung Diseases
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 The Significance of Single-Cell Biomedicine in Stem Cells
Attention for Chapter 12: Emergence of Bias During the Synthesis and Amplification of cDNA for scRNA-seq
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 (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
19 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.
Chapter title
Emergence of Bias During the Synthesis and Amplification of cDNA for scRNA-seq
Chapter number 12
Book title
Single Cell Biomedicine
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-0502-3_12
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-130501-6, 978-9-81-130502-3
Authors

Qiankun Luo, Hui Zhang, Luo, Qiankun, Zhang, Hui

Abstract

The advent of single-cell omics technology has promoted our understanding of the genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic heterogeneity in individual cells. Compared to traditional sequencing studies using bulk cells, single-cell transcriptome technology is naturally more dynamic for in depth analysis of genomic variation resulting from cell division and is useful in unraveling the regulatory mechanisms of gene networks in many diseases. However, there are still some limitations of current single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) protocols. Biases that arise during the RNA reverse transcription and cDNA pre-amplification steps are the most common problems and play pivotal roles in limiting the quantitative accuracy of scRNA-seq. In this review, we will describe how these biases emerge and impact scRNA-seq protocols. Moreover, we will introduce several current and convenient modified scRNA-seq methods that allow for bias to be decreased and estimated.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Professor 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Computer Science 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,011,732
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,285
of 4,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,086
of 442,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#92
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 442,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 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 54% of its contemporaries.