↓ Skip to main content

Dataset and standard operating procedure for newborn screening of six lysosomal storage diseases: By tandem mass spectrometry

Overview of attention for article published in Data in Brief, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Dataset and standard operating procedure for newborn screening of six lysosomal storage diseases: By tandem mass spectrometry
Published in
Data in Brief, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.dib.2016.06.052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan Elliott, Norman Buroker, Jason J. Cournoyer, Anna M. Potier, Joseph D. Trometer, Carole Elbin, Mack J. Schermer, Jaana Kantola, Aaron Boyce, Frantisek Turecek, Michael H. Gelb, C. Ronald Scott

Abstract

In this data article we provide a detailed standard operating procedure for performing a tandem mass spectrometry, multiplex assay of 6 lysosomal enzymes for newborn screening of the lysosomal storage diseases Mucopolysaccharidosis-I, Pompe, Fabry, Niemann-Pick-A/B, Gaucher, and Krabbe, (Elliott, et al., 2016) [1]. We also provide the mass spectrometry peak areas for the product and internal standard ions typically observed with a dried blood spot punch from a random newborn, and we provide the daily variation of the daily mean activities for all 6 enzymes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 6 25%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Chemistry 3 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%

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 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#10,123,132
of 12,663,565 outputs
Outputs from Data in Brief
#486
of 898 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,891
of 262,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Data in Brief
#44
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,663,565 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 898 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 262,667 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 84 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.