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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Lack of reliability of nanotechnology in the of free plasma DNA in samples of patients with prostate cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Medicine, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1755-7682-6-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ricardo Moreno, Pamela O Delgado, Patrícia G Coelho, Sarah R Marsicano, Viviane AV Boas, Ligia A Azzalis, Virgínia BC Junqueira, Katya C Rocha, Luiz Carlos de Abreu, Vitor E Valenti, Jefferson Drezzet, Edimar Cristiano Pereira, Fernando LA Fonseca |
| Abstract |
BACKGROUND: Several studies seek biological markers that give diagnostic and degree of tumor development. The aim of this study was to validate the determination of plasma DNA using nanotechnology (Nanovue™-NV) in samples of 80 patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: Blood samples of 80 patients of the Urology Ambulatory of Faculdade de Medicina do ABC with prostate cancer confirmed by anatomical-pathology criteria were analyzed. DNA extraction was performed using a GFX TM kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Inc, USA) following the adapted protocol. Plasma was subjected to centrifugation. RESULTS: There was a big difference between the first and the second value obtained by NanoVue Only two samples had no differences between duplicates. Maximum difference between duplicates was 38 μg/mL. Average variation between 51 samples was 10.29 μg/mL, although 21 samples had differences above this average. No correlation was observed between pDNA obtained by traditional spectrophotometry and by nanotechnology. CONCLUSION: Determination of plasma DNA by nanotechnology was not reproducible. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 33% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 17% |
| Professor | 1 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 17% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 17% |
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 12 January 2013.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Medicine
#70
of 103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,470
of 290,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Medicine
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 290,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.