| Title |
Twenty-first century brain banking. Processing brains for research: the Columbia University methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Neuropathologica, November 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00401-007-0311-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean Paul G. Vonsattel, Maria Pilar del Amaya, Christian E. Keller |
| Abstract |
Carefully categorized postmortem human brains are crucial for research. The lack of generally accepted methods for processing human postmortem brains for research persists. Thus, brain banking is essential; however, it cannot be achieved at the cost of the teaching mission of the academic institution by routing brains away from residency programs, particularly when the autopsy rate is steadily decreasing. A consensus must be reached whereby a brain can be utilizable for diagnosis, research, and teaching. The best diagnostic categorization possible must be secured and the yield of samples for basic investigation maximized. This report focuses on integrated, novel methods currently applied at the New York Brain Bank, Columbia University, New York, which are designed to reach accurate neuropathological diagnosis, optimize the yield of samples, and process fresh-frozen samples suitable for a wide range of modern investigations. The brains donated for research are processed as soon as possible after death. The prosector must have a good command of the neuroanatomy, neuropathology, and the protocol. One half of each brain is immersed in formalin for performing the thorough neuropathologic evaluation, which is combined with the teaching task. The contralateral half is extensively dissected at the fresh state. The anatomical origin of each sample is recorded using the map of Brodmann for the cortical samples. The samples are frozen at -160 degrees C, barcode labeled, and ready for immediate disbursement once categorized diagnostically. A rigorous organization of freezer space, coupled to an electronic tracking system with its attached software, fosters efficient access for retrieval within minutes of any specific frozen samples in storage. This report describes how this achievement is feasible with emphasis on the actual processing of brains donated for research. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Czechia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| China | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 16% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 22% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 18% |
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 19 February 2015.
All research outputs
#5,672,810
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica
#1,203
of 2,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,231
of 77,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,369 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 77,663 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 12 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 66% of its contemporaries.