↓ Skip to main content

Specific, sensitive and rapid detection of human plasmodium knowlesi infection by loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) in blood samples

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Specific, sensitive and rapid detection of human plasmodium knowlesi infection by loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) in blood samples
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2011
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-10-197
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yee-Ling Lau, Mun-Yik Fong, Rohela Mahmud, Phooi-Yee Chang, Vanitha Palaeya, Fei-Wen Cheong, Lit-Chein Chin, Claudia N Anthony, Abdulsalam M Al-Mekhlafi, Yeng Chen

Abstract

The emergence of Plasmodium knowlesi in humans, which is in many cases misdiagnosed by microscopy as Plasmodium malariae due to the morphological similarity has contributed to the needs of detection and differentiation of malaria parasites. At present, nested PCR targeted on Plasmodium ssrRNA genes has been described as the most sensitive and specific method for Plasmodium detection. However, this method is costly and requires trained personnel for its implementation. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), a novel nucleic acid amplification method was developed for the clinical detection of P. knowlesi. The sensitivity and specificity of LAMP was evaluated in comparison to the results obtained via microscopic examination and nested PCR.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
United States 2 2%
Colombia 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Burkina Faso 1 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 123 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 22%
Researcher 24 18%
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 17 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 17%
Engineering 5 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 22 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 21 August 2011.
All research outputs
#15,233,109
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,444
of 5,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,832
of 119,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#37
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 119,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.