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 |
Different approaches for interpretation and reporting of immunohistochemistry analysis results in the bone tissue – a review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-014-0221-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nickolay Fedchenko, Janin Reifenrath |
| Abstract |
BackgroundImmunohistochemistry (IHC) is a well-established, widely accepted method in both clinical and experimental parts of medical science. It allows receiving valuable information about any process in any tissue, and especially in bone. Each year the amount of data, received by IHC, grows in geometric progression. But the lack of standardization, especially on the post-analytical stage (interpreting and reporting of results), makes the comparison of the results of different studies impossible.MethodsComprehensive PubMED literature search with a combination of search words ¿immunohistochemistry¿ and ¿scoring system¿ was performed and 773 articles describing IHC results were identified. After further manual analysis 120 articles were selected for detailed evaluation of used approaches.ResultsSix major approaches to the interpretation and presentation of IHC analysis results were identified, analyzed and described.ConclusionsThe overview of the existing approaches in evaluation and interpretation of IHC data, which are provided in the article, can be used in bone tissue research and for either better understanding of existing scoring systems or developing a new one. Standard multiparametric, semiquantitative IHC scoring systems should simplify and clarify the process of interpretation and reporting of received data.Virtual SlidesThe virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_221. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 674 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 668 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 102 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 81 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 73 | 11% |
| Researcher | 51 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 47 | 7% |
| Other | 129 | 19% |
| Unknown | 191 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 215 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 98 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 19 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 17 | 3% |
| Other | 74 | 11% |
| Unknown | 210 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 December 2014.
All research outputs
#13,924,721
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#391
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,799
of 361,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#20
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 361,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 61% of its contemporaries.