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 |
Screening immunofixation should replace protein electrophoresis as the initial investigation of monoclonal gammopathy: Point
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1515/cclm-2015-0699 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carel J. Pretorius |
| Abstract |
The reliable detection of paraprotein in serum and urine is the primary purpose of electrophoretic procedures in clinical laboratories. Screening immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFE) employs a single application of antisera directed against heavy and light chains that facilitates the detection of paraproteins that migrate in the non-γ region or that are below the detection limit of protein electrophoresis. These paraproteins that are missed by routine electrophoresis occur in up to 27.3% of newly investigated and 13.6% of monitored patients. Small paraproteins missed by conventional electrophoretic techniques are clinically important in the diagnosis and monitoring of malignant plasma and B-cell disorders. The superior diagnostic performance of sIFE makes it suitable as the initial laboratory procedure to investigate paraproteins in complex serum and urine matrices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 23% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 November 2015.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
#1,574
of 2,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,565
of 392,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
#63
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,902 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 392,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.