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 |
Immunohistochemistry is highly sensitive and specific for detection of BRAF V600E mutation in pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Neuropathologica Communications, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2051-5960-1-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cristiane M Ida, Julie A Vrana, Fausto J Rodriguez, Mark E Jentoft, Alissa A Caron, Sarah M Jenkins, Caterina Giannini |
| Abstract |
High frequencies of the BRAF V600E mutation have been reported in pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA). Recently, a BRAF V600E mutation-specific antibody has been developed and validated. We evaluated the immunohistochemical (IHC) detection of BRAF V600E mutation in PXA by comparing to gold standard molecular analysis and investigating the interobserver variability of the IHC scoring. We performed BRAF V600E IHC in 46 cases, of which 37 (80%) cases had sufficient tumor tissue for molecular analysis. IHC detection was performed using monoclonal mouse antibody VE1 (Spring Bioscience). IHC slides were scored independently by four reviewers blind to molecular data, including a primary (gold standard) and three additional reviewers. BRAF V600E mutation status was assessed by allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with fragment analysis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 50% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 19% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
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 31 May 2013.
All research outputs
#18,339,860
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#1,225
of 1,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,213
of 195,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#22
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 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 1,366 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 195,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.