↓ Skip to main content

Metabolomic Profiling in Perinatal Asphyxia: A Promising New Field

Overview of attention for article published in BioMed Research International, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Metabolomic Profiling in Perinatal Asphyxia: A Promising New Field
Published in
BioMed Research International, January 2015
DOI 10.1155/2015/254076
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niamh M. Denihan, Geraldine B. Boylan, Deirdre M. Murray

Abstract

Metabolomics, the latest "omic" technology, is defined as the comprehensive study of all low molecular weight biochemicals, "metabolites" present in an organism. As a systems biology approach, metabolomics has huge potential to progress our understanding of perinatal asphyxia and neonatal hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, by uniquely detecting rapid biochemical pathway alterations in response to the hypoxic environment. The study of metabolomic biomarkers in the immediate neonatal period is not a trivial task and requires a number of specific considerations, unique to this disease and population. Recruiting a clearly defined cohort requires standardised multicentre recruitment with broad inclusion criteria and the participation of a range of multidisciplinary staff. Minimally invasive biospecimen collection is a priority for biomarker discovery. Umbilical cord blood presents an ideal medium as large volumes can be easily extracted and stored and the sample is not confounded by postnatal disease progression. Pristine biobanking and phenotyping are essential to ensure the validity of metabolomic findings. This paper provides an overview of the current state of the art in the field of metabolomics in perinatal asphyxia and neonatal hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy. We detail the considerations required to ensure high quality sampling and analysis, to support scientific progression in this important field.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 77 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 19 24%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 9%
Engineering 3 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 18 23%

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 09 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,537,707
of 18,202,333 outputs
Outputs from BioMed Research International
#4,554
of 7,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,417
of 232,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMed Research International
#35
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,202,333 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,926 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 232,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.