| Title |
Temporal dynamics of the multi-omic response to endurance exercise training
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, May 2024
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41586-023-06877-w |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dam Bae, Surendra Dasari, Courtney Dennis, Charles R. Evans, David A. Gaul, Olga Ilkayeva, Anna A. Ivanova, Maureen T. Kachman, Hasmik Keshishian, Ian R. Lanza, Ana C. Lira, Michael J. Muehlbauer, Venugopalan D. Nair, Paul D. Piehowski, Jessica L. Rooney, Kevin S. Smith, Cynthia L. Stowe, Bingqing Zhao, Natalie M. Clark, David Jimenez-Morales, Malene E. Lindholm, Gina M. Many, James A. Sanford, Gregory R. Smith, Nikolai G. Vetr, Tiantian Zhang, Jose J. Almagro Armenteros, Julian Avila-Pacheco, Nasim Bararpour, Yongchao Ge, Zhenxin Hou, Shruti Marwaha, David M. Presby, Archana Natarajan Raja, Evan M. Savage, Alec Steep, Yifei Sun, Si Wu, Jimmy Zhen, Sue C. Bodine, Karyn A. Esser, Laurie J. Goodyear, Simon Schenk, Stephen B. Montgomery, Facundo M. Fernández, Stuart C. Sealfon, Michael P. Snyder, Joshua N. Adkins, Euan Ashley, Charles F. Burant, Steven A. Carr, Clary B. Clish, Gary Cutter, Robert E. Gerszten, William E. Kraus, Jun Z. Li, Michael E. Miller, K. Sreekumaran Nair, Christopher Newgard, Eric A. Ortlund, Wei-Jun Qian, Russell Tracy, Martin J. Walsh, Matthew T. Wheeler, Karen P. Dalton, Trevor Hastie, Steven G. Hershman, Mihir Samdarshi, Christopher Teng, Rob Tibshirani, Elaine Cornell, Nicole Gagne, Sandy May, Brian Bouverat, Christiaan Leeuwenburgh, Ching-ju Lu, Marco Pahor, Fang-Chi Hsu, Scott Rushing, Michael P. Walkup, Barbara Nicklas, W. Jack Rejeski, John P. Williams, Ashley Xia, Brent G. Albertson, Elisabeth R. Barton, Frank W. Booth, Tiziana Caputo, Michael Cicha, Luis Gustavo Oliveira De Sousa, Roger Farrar, Andrea L. Hevener, Michael F. Hirshman, Bailey E. Jackson, Benjamin G. Ke, Kyle S. Kramer, Sarah J. Lessard, Nathan S. Makarewicz, Andrea G. Marshall, Pasquale Nigro, Scott Powers, Krithika Ramachandran, R. Scott Rector, Collyn Z-T. Richards, John Thyfault, Zhen Yan, Chongzhi Zang, Mary Anne S. Amper, Ali Tugrul Balci, Clarisa Chavez, Maria Chikina, Roxanne Chiu, Marina A. Gritsenko, Kristy Guevara, Joshua R. Hansen, Krista M. Hennig, Chia-Jui Hung, Chelsea Hutchinson-Bunch, Christopher A. Jin, Xueyun Liu, Kristal M. Maner-Smith, D. R. Mani, Nada Marjanovic, Matthew E. Monroe, Ronald J. Moore, Samuel G. Moore, Charles C. Mundorff, Daniel Nachun, Michael D. Nestor, German Nudelman, Cadence Pearce, Vladislav A. Petyuk, Hanna Pincas, Irene Ramos, Alexander (Sasha) Raskind, Stas Rirak, Jeremy M. Robbins, Aliza B. Rubenstein, Frederique Ruf-Zamojski, Tyler J. Sagendorf, Nitish Seenarine, Tanu Soni, Karan Uppal, Sindhu Vangeti, Mital Vasoya, Alexandria Vornholt, Xuechen Yu, Elena Zaslavsky, Navid Zebarjadi, Marcas Bamman, Bryan C. Bergman, Daniel H. Bessesen, Thomas W. Buford, Toby L. Chambers, Paul M. Coen, Dan Cooper, Fadia Haddad, Kishore Gadde, Bret H. Goodpaster, Melissa Harris, Kim M. Huffman, Catherine M. Jankowski, Neil M. Johannsen, Wendy M. Kohrt, Bridget Lester, Edward L. Melanson, Kerrie L. Moreau, Nicolas Musi, Robert L. Newton, Shlomit Radom-Aizik, Megan E. Ramaker, Tuomo Rankinen, Blake B. Rasmussen, Eric Ravussin, Irene E. Schauer, Robert S. Schwartz, Lauren M. Sparks, Anna Thalacker-Mercer, Scott Trappe, Todd A. Trappe, Elena Volpi |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 810 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 96 | 12% |
| Japan | 23 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 17 | 2% |
| France | 11 | 1% |
| Australia | 10 | 1% |
| Italy | 8 | <1% |
| Germany | 7 | <1% |
| Brazil | 6 | <1% |
| Spain | 6 | <1% |
| Other | 56 | 7% |
| Unknown | 570 | 70% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 517 | 64% |
| Scientists | 231 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 44 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 18 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 114 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 11 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 22% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 26 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 11 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 30 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 870. 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 19 June 2024.
All research outputs
#21,408
of 26,176,298 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#2,086
of 99,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#343
of 323,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#39
of 1,118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,176,298 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 103.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
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 323,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.