↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Standard addition with internal standardisation as an alternative to using stable isotope labelled internal standards to correct for matrix effects—Comparison and validation using liquid chromatography-​tandem mass spectrometric assay of vitamin D
Published in
Journal of Chromatography A, April 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.chroma.2018.04.026
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

With mass spectrometric detection in liquid chromatography, co-eluting impurities affect the analyte response due to ion suppression/enhancement. Internal standard calibration method, using co-eluting stable isotope labelled analogue of each analyte as the internal standard, is the most appropriate technique available to correct for these matrix effects. However, this technique is not without drawbacks, proved to be expensive because separate internal standard for each analyte is required, and the labelled compounds are expensive or require synthesising. Traditionally, standard addition method has been used to overcome the matrix effects in atomic spectroscopy and was a well-established method. This paper proposes the same for mass spectrometric detection, and demonstrates that the results are comparable to those with the internal standard method using labelled analogues, for vitamin D assay. As conventional standard addition procedure does not address procedural errors, we propose the inclusion of an additional internal standard (not co-eluting). Recoveries determined on human serum samples show that the proposed method of standard addition yields more accurate results than the internal standardisation using stable isotope labelled analogues. The precision of the proposed method of standard addition is superior to the conventional standard addition method.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 32 48%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 13 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Unspecified 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 37 56%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Chromatography A
#10,809
of 11,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,125
of 343,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Chromatography A
#63
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,808 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 343,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.