↓ Skip to main content

Isolation of nucleated red blood cells in maternal blood for Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Isolation of nucleated red blood cells in maternal blood for Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis
Published in
Biomedical Microdevices, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10544-015-0021-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yeongje Byeon, Chang-Seok Ki, Ki-Ho Han

Abstract

This paper introduces a two-step cascade enrichment method for isolating nucleated red blood cells (NRBCs) in maternal blood. The two-step enrichment platform consists of a positive enrichment process based on a red blood cell (RBC) hyperaggregation method and a negative enrichment process using microfluidic technology. An analytical evaluation using blood samples from patients with leukemia showed that the while blood cell (WBC) depletion and NRBC loss rates of the positive enrichment process were 93.98 % and 6.02 %, respectively. Through the two-step cascade enrichment method, 1-396 NRBCs and only 0-6 WBCs were isolated from 1 mL of 18 maternal blood samples. Experimental results also showed that the WBC depletion rate of the proposed two-step method was more than 625,000-fold, and the purity of enriched NRBCs ranged from 20 % to 100 %. Furthermore, SRY (the sex-determining region of the Y chromosome) genes were detected in enriched NRBCs, thereby demonstrating that enriched NRBCs contain fetus-derived NRBCs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Engineering 5 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 November 2020.
All research outputs
#7,224,351
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#221
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,056
of 386,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 386,484 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 69% 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 75% of its contemporaries.