We determined a series of quality control (QC) analyses to assess the usability of DNA collected and processed from different countries utilizing different DNA extraction techniques prior to genome-wide association studies (GWAS). The quality of DNA collected utilizing four different DNA extraction techniques and the impact of shipping DNA at different temperatures on array performance were evaluated. Fifteen maternal-fetal pairs were used from four countries. DNA was extracted using four approaches: whole blood, blood spots with whole genome amplification (WGA), saliva and buccal swab. Samples were sent to a genotyping facility, either on dry ice or at room temperature and genotyped using Affymetrix SNP array 6.0. QC measured included extraction techniques, effect of shipping temperatures, accuracy and Mendelian concordance. Significantly fewer (50 % ) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) passed QC metrics for buccal swab DNA (P < 0.0001) due to missing genotype data (P < 0.0001). Whole blood or saliva DNA had the highest call rates (99.2 0.4 % and 99.3 0.2 % , respectively) and Mendelian concordance. Shipment temperature had no effect. DNA from blood or saliva had the highest call rate accuracy, and buccal swabs had the lowest. DNA extracted from blood, saliva and blood spots were found suitable for GWAS in our study.
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 24 April 2014.
All research outputs
#11,979,090
of 34,518,147 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Perinatal Medicine
#371
of 1,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,532
of 224,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Perinatal Medicine
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,518,147 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 224,747 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 52% of its contemporaries.
