↓ Skip to main content

A novel multiplex PCR-RFLP method for simultaneous detection of the MTHFR 677 C > T, eNOS +894 G > T and - eNOS -786 T > C variants among Malaysian Malays

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genetics, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
A novel multiplex PCR-RFLP method for simultaneous detection of the MTHFR 677 C > T, eNOS +894 G > T and - eNOS -786 T > C variants among Malaysian Malays
Published in
BMC Medical Genetics, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2350-13-34
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keat Wei Loo, Lyn Robyn Griffiths, Siew Hua Gan

Abstract

Hyperhomocysteinemia as a consequence of the MTHFR 677 C > T variant is associated with cardiovascular disease and stroke. Another factor that can potentially contribute to these disorders is a depleted nitric oxide level, which can be due to the presence of eNOS +894 G > T and eNOS -786 T > C variants that make an individual more susceptible to endothelial dysfunction. A number of genotyping methods have been developed to investigate these variants. However, simultaneous detection methods using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) analysis are still lacking. In this study, a novel multiplex PCR-RFLP method for the simultaneous detection of MTHFR 677 C > T and eNOS +894 G > T and eNOS -786 T > C variants was developed. A total of 114 healthy Malay subjects were recruited. The MTHFR 677 C > T and eNOS +894 G > T and eNOS -786 T > C variants were genotyped using the novel multiplex PCR-RFLP and confirmed by DNA sequencing as well as snpBLAST. Allele frequencies of MTHFR 677 C > T and eNOS +894 G > T and eNOS -786 T > C were calculated using the Hardy Weinberg equation.

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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 7 20%

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 20 May 2012.
All research outputs
#9,905,470
of 12,372,276 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genetics
#473
of 729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,179
of 118,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genetics
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,276 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 729 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 118,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 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.