↓ Skip to main content

Detection of an amphiphilic biosample in a paper microchannel based on length

Overview of attention for article published in Biomedical Microdevices, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 747)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Detection of an amphiphilic biosample in a paper microchannel based on length
Published in
Biomedical Microdevices, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10544-015-9954-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu-Tzu Chen, Jing-Tang Yang

Abstract

We developed a simple method to achieve semiquantitative detection of an amphiphilic biosample through measuring the length of flow on a microfluidic analytical device (μPAD) based on paper. When an amphiphilic sample was dripped into a straight microchannel defined with a printed wax barrier (hydrophobic) on filter paper (hydrophilic), the length of flow was affected by the reciprocal effect between the sample, the filter-paper channel and the wax barrier. The flow length decreased with increasing concentration of an amphiphilic sample because of adsorption of the sample on the hydrophobic barrier. Measurement of the flow length enabled a determination of the concentration of the amphiphilic sample. The several tested samples included surfactants (Tween 20 and Triton X-100), oligonucleotides (DNA), bovine serum albumin (BSA), human albumin, nitrite, glucose and low-density lipoprotein (LDL). The results show that the measurement of the flow length determined directly the concentration of an amphiphilic sample, whereas a non-amphiphilic sample was not amenable to this method. The proposed method features the advantages of small cost, simplicity, convenience, directness, rapidity (<5 min) and requirement of only a small volume (5 μL) of sample, with prospective applications in developing areas and sites near patients for testing at a point of care (POCT).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Master 7 19%
Other 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 8 22%
Engineering 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Chemical Engineering 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 13 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#2,324,515
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#19
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,609
of 263,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 263,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.