↓ Skip to main content

Biomarkers for nutrient intake with focus on alternative sampling techniques

Overview of attention for article published in Genes & Nutrition, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
163 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.
Title
Biomarkers for nutrient intake with focus on alternative sampling techniques
Published in
Genes & Nutrition, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12263-016-0527-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. Holen, F. Norheim, T. E. Gundersen, P. Mitry, J. Linseisen, P. O. Iversen, C. A. Drevon

Abstract

Biomarkers of nutrient intake or nutrient status are important objective measures of foods/nutrients as one of the most important environmental factors people are exposed to. It is very difficult to obtain accurate data on individual food intake, and there is a large variation of nutrient composition of foods consumed in a population. Thus, it is difficult to obtain precise measures of exposure to different nutrients and thereby be able to understand the relationship between diet, health, and disease. This is the background for investing considerable resources in studying biomarkers of nutrients believed to be important in our foods. Modern technology with high sensitivity and specificity concerning many nutrient biomarkers has allowed an interesting development with analyses of very small amounts of blood or tissue material. In combination with non-professional collection of blood by finger-pricking and collection on filters or sticks, this may make collection of samples and analyses of biomarkers much more available for scientists as well as health professionals and even lay people in particular in relation to the marked trend of self-monitoring of body functions linked to mobile phone technology. Assuming standard operating procedures are used for collection, drying, transport, extraction, and analysis of samples, it turns out that many analytes of nutritional interest can be measured like metabolites, drugs, lipids, vitamins, minerals, and many types of peptides and proteins. The advantage of this alternative sampling technology is that non-professionals can collect, dry, and mail the samples; the samples can often be stored under room temperature in a dry atmosphere, requiring small amounts of blood. Another promising area is the potential relation between the microbiome and biomarkers that may be measured in feces as well as in blood.

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 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 162 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Other 15 9%
Student > Master 13 8%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 34 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 10%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 48 29%
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 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,467,727
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Nutrition
#297
of 388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,899
of 269,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Nutrition
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 269,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.