↓ Skip to main content

The Long and Short Non-coding RNAs in Cancer Biology

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 3: The Long and Short Non-coding RNAs in Cancer Biology
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
The Long and Short Non-coding RNAs in Cancer Biology
Chapter number 3
Book title
The Long and Short Non-coding RNAs in Cancer Biology
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-1498-7_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-101496-3, 978-9-81-101498-7
Authors

Luo, Man-Li, Man-Li Luo

Editors

Erwei Song

Abstract

Thousands of long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been discovered in recent years. The functions of lncRNAs range broadly from regulating chromatin structure and gene expression in the nucleus to controlling messenger RNA (mRNA) processing, mRNA posttranscriptional regulation, cellular signaling, and protein activity in the cytoplasm. Experimental and computational techniques have been developed to characterize lncRNAs in high-throughput scale, to study the lncRNA function in vitro and in vivo, to map lncRNA binding sites on the genome, and to capture lncRNA-protein interactions with the identification of lncRNA-binding partners, binding sites, and interaction determinants. In this chapter, we will discuss these technologies and their applications in decoding the functions of lncRNAs. Understanding these techniques including their advantages and disadvantages and developing them in the future will be essential to elaborate the roles of lncRNAs in cancer and other diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 25 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Master 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,379,760
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,507
of 4,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,059
of 355,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#36
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 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 4,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 355,070 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 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.