↓ Skip to main content

Virtual reality assisted microscopy data visualization and colocalization analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Virtual reality assisted microscopy data visualization and colocalization analysis
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1446-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rensu P. Theart, Ben Loos, Thomas R. Niesler

Abstract

Confocal microscopes deliver detailed three-dimensional data and are instrumental in biological analysis and research. Usually, this three-dimensional data is rendered as a projection onto a two-dimensional display. We describe a system for rendering such data using a modern virtual reality (VR) headset. Sample manipulation is possible by fully-immersive hand-tracking and also by means of a conventional gamepad. We apply this system to the specific task of colocalization analysis, an important analysis tool in biological microscopy. We evaluate our system by means of a set of user trials. The user trials show that, despite inaccuracies which still plague the hand tracking, this is the most productive and intuitive interface. The inaccuracies nevertheless lead to a perception among users that productivity is low, resulting in a subjective preference for the gamepad. Fully-immersive manipulation was shown to be particularly effective when defining a region of interest (ROI) for colocalization analysis. Virtual reality offers an attractive and powerful means of visualization for microscopy data. Fully immersive interfaces using hand tracking show the highest levels of intuitiveness and consequent productivity. However, current inaccuracies in hand tracking performance still lead to a disproportionately critical user perception.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 27%
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 10 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Engineering 5 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Design 2 5%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 5 12%

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 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,799,399
of 11,877,834 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,638
of 4,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,398
of 272,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#51
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,877,834 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,337 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 272,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.