| Title |
Biomarkers: Potential uses and limitations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurotherapeutics, April 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1602/neurorx.1.2.182 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard Mayeux |
| Abstract |
Biomarkers provide a dynamic and powerful approach to understanding the spectrum of neurological disease with applications in observational and analytic epidemiology, randomized clinical trials, screening and diagnosis and prognosis. Defined as alterations in the constituents of tissues or body fluids, these markers offer the means for homogeneous classification of a disease and risk factors, and the can extend our base information about the underlying pathogenesis of disease. Biomarkers can also reflect the entire spectrum of disease from the earliest manifestations to the terminal stages. This brief review describes the major uses of biomarkers in clinical investigation. Careful assessment of the validity of biomarkers is required with respect to the stage of disease. Causes of variability in the measurement of biomarkers range from the individual to the laboratory. Issues that affect the analysis of biomarkers are discussed along with recommendations on how to deal with bias and confounding. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,700 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 13 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1665 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 320 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 295 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 252 | 15% |
| Researcher | 150 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 78 | 5% |
| Other | 196 | 12% |
| Unknown | 409 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 250 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 227 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 201 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 106 | 6% |
| Engineering | 74 | 4% |
| Other | 369 | 22% |
| Unknown | 473 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 27 March 2024.
All research outputs
#941,886
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#67
of 1,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#983
of 67,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 67,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.