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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Commercialisation of Biomarker Tests for Mental Illnesses: Advances and Obstacles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Biotechnology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.09.010 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Man K. Chan, Jason D. Cooper, Sabine Bahn |
| Abstract |
Substantial strides have been made in the field of biomarker research for mental illnesses over the past few decades. However, no US FDA-cleared blood-based biomarker tests have been translated into routine clinical practice. Here, we review the challenges associated with commercialisation of research findings and discuss how these challenges can impede scientific impact and progress. Overall evidence indicates that a lack of research funding and poor reproducibility of findings were the most important obstacles to commercialization of biomarker tests. Fraud, pre-analytical and analytical limitations, and inappropriate statistical analysis are major contributors to poor reproducibility. Increasingly, these issues are acknowledged and actions are being taken to improve data validity, raising the hope that robust biomarker tests will become available in the foreseeable future. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 Kingdom | 4 | 22% |
| United States | 3 | 17% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 13% |
| Psychology | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 December 2015.
All research outputs
#2,954,012
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Biotechnology
#537
of 2,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,300
of 297,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Biotechnology
#8
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 297,295 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.