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 |
Loop Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) Accurately Detects Malaria DNA from Filter Paper Blood Samples of Low Density Parasitaemias
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0103905 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Berit Aydin-Schmidt, Weiping Xu, Iveth J. González, Spencer D. Polley, David Bell, Delér Shakely, Mwinyi I. Msellem, Anders Björkman, Andreas Mårtensson |
| Abstract |
Loop mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) provides an opportunity for improved, field-friendly detection of malaria infections in endemic areas. However data on the diagnostic accuracy of LAMP for active case detection, particularly low-density parasitaemias, are lacking. We therefore evaluated the performance of a new LAMP kit compared with PCR using DNA from filter paper blood spots. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Burkina Faso | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 146 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 17% |
| Researcher | 25 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 24 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 6% |
| Engineering | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 June 2015.
All research outputs
#3,258,428
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#42,862
of 194,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,193
of 230,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#890
of 4,696 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,199 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 230,503 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,696 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.