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 |
A method for reproducible measurements of serum BDNF: comparison of the performance of six commercial assays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep17989 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessio Polacchini, Giuliana Metelli, Ruggiero Francavilla, Gabriele Baj, Marina Florean, Luca Giovanni Mascaretti, Enrico Tongiorgi |
| Abstract |
Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) has attracted increasing interest as potential biomarker to support the diagnosis or monitor the efficacy of therapies in brain disorders. Circulating BDNF can be measured in serum, plasma or whole blood. However, the use of BDNF as biomarker is limited by the poor reproducibility of results, likely due to the variety of methods used for sample collection and BDNF analysis. To overcome these limitations, using sera from 40 healthy adults, we compared the performance of five ELISA kits (Aviscera-Bioscience, Biosensis, Millipore-ChemiKine(TM), Promega-Emax(®), R&D-System-Quantikine(®)) and one multiplexing assay (Millipore-Milliplex(®)). All kits showed 100% sample recovery and comparable range. However, they exhibited very different inter-assay variations from 5% to 20%. Inter-assay variations were higher than those declared by the manufacturers with only one exception which also had the best overall performance. Dot-blot analysis revealed that two kits selectively recognize mature BDNF, while the others reacted with both pro-BDNF and mature BDNF. In conclusion, we identified two assays to obtain reliable measurements of human serum BDNF, suitable for future clinical applications. |
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 312 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 308 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 54 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 16% |
| Researcher | 38 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 48 | 15% |
| Unknown | 72 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 50 | 16% |
| Psychology | 24 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 7% |
| Other | 55 | 18% |
| Unknown | 85 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 11 April 2018.
All research outputs
#712,725
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#7,758
of 142,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,767
of 396,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#162
of 2,711 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 142,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 396,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,711 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.