↓ Skip to main content

The development of malaria diagnostic techniques: a review of the approaches with focus on dielectrophoretic and magnetophoretic methods

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
220 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
The development of malaria diagnostic techniques: a review of the approaches with focus on dielectrophoretic and magnetophoretic methods
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1400-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Surasak Kasetsirikul, Jirayut Buranapong, Werayut Srituravanich, Morakot Kaewthamasorn, Alongkorn Pimpin

Abstract

The large number of deaths caused by malaria each year has increased interest in the development of effective malaria diagnoses. At the early-stage of infection, patients show non-specific symptoms or are asymptomatic, which makes it difficult for clinical diagnosis, especially in non-endemic areas. Alternative diagnostic methods that are timely and effective are required to identify infections, particularly in field settings. This article reviews conventional malaria diagnostic methods together with recently developed techniques for both malaria detection and infected erythrocyte separation. Although many alternative techniques have recently been proposed and studied, dielectrophoretic and magnetophoretic approaches are among the promising new techniques due to their high specificity for malaria parasite-infected red blood cells. The two approaches are discussed in detail, including their principles, types, applications and limitations. In addition, other recently developed techniques, such as cell deformability and morphology, are also overviewed in this article.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 218 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 16%
Student > Master 30 14%
Student > Bachelor 27 12%
Researcher 20 9%
Student > Postgraduate 14 6%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 59 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 37 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 7%
Physics and Astronomy 10 5%
Other 47 21%
Unknown 66 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 December 2023.
All research outputs
#6,526,929
of 25,468,708 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,552
of 5,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,774
of 370,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#30
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,468,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 370,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.