| Title |
Dataset and standard operating procedure for newborn screening of six lysosomal storage diseases: By tandem mass spectrometry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Data in Brief, July 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. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
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
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Data in Brief
#2,355
of 3,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,892
of 370,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Data in Brief
#64
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,678 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 370,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.