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 |
Isolation of human genomic DNA for genetic analysis from premature neonates: a comparison between newborn dried blood spots, whole blood and umbilical cord tissue
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Genomic Data, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2156-14-105 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shavanthi Rajatileka, Karen Luyt, Manal El-Bokle, Maggie Williams, Helena Kemp, Elek Molnár, Anikó Váradi |
| Abstract |
Genotyping requires biological sample collection that must be reliable, convenient and acceptable for patients and clinicians. Finding the most optimal procedure of sample collection for premature neonates who have a very limited blood volume is a particular challenge. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the use of umbilical cord (UC) tissue and newborn dried blood spot (DBS)-extracted genomic DNA (gDNA) as an alternative to venous blood-derived gDNA from premature neonates for molecular genetic analysis.All samples were obtained from premature newborn infants between 24-32 weeks of gestation. Paired blood and UC samples were collected from 31 study participants. gDNA was extracted from ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) anticoagulant-treated blood samples (~500 μl) and newborn DBSs (n = 723) using QIAamp DNA Micro kit (Qiagen Ltd., Crawley, UK); and from UC using Qiagen DNAeasy Blood and Tissue kit (Qiagen Ltd., Crawley, UK). gDNA was quantified and purity confirmed by measuring the A260:A280 ratio. PCR amplification and pyrosequencing was carried out to determine suitability of the gDNA for molecular genetic analysis. Minor allele frequency of two unrelated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) was calculated using the entire cohort. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 24% |
| Researcher | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 16% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 September 2020.
All research outputs
#15,091,226
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomic Data
#473
of 1,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,958
of 225,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomic Data
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,204 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 225,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.