↓ Skip to main content

Chemical Diagnostics

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 354: Application of Mass Spectrometry in Newborn Screening: About Both Small Molecular Diseases and Lysosomal Storage Diseases
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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.
Chapter title
Application of Mass Spectrometry in Newborn Screening: About Both Small Molecular Diseases and Lysosomal Storage Diseases
Chapter number 354
Book title
Chemical Diagnostics
Published in
Topics in current chemistry, August 2012
DOI 10.1007/128_2012_354
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-64-239941-1, 978-3-64-239942-8
Authors

Wuh-Liang Hwu, Yin-Hsiu Chien, Ni-Chung Lee, Shiao-Fang Wang, Shu-Chuan Chiang, Li-Wen Hsu

Abstract

Many genetic diseases, especially the inborn errors of metabolism, have very low incidences, so developing a newborn screening test for each disease is not practical. This obstacle was overcome by employing the tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) technology. In the analysis, the samples can be injected directly into the flowing system without passing through a column, and both acylcarnitine and amino acid profiles can be obtained at the same time. MS/MS newborn screening has been shown to improve the outcome of patients affected by a number of inborn errors of metabolism. Recently, MS/MS analytical methods were developed for second-tier tests of newborn screening; new substrates have also been developed to measure the activity of lysosomal enzymes so lysosomal storage diseases can be diagnosed by MS/MS method now.

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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 30%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 20%
Student > Master 2 20%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 20%
Chemistry 2 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 10%
Neuroscience 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 August 2012.
All research outputs
#14,732,278
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Topics in current chemistry
#101
of 148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,083
of 169,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Topics in current chemistry
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 148 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 169,206 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.