| Chapter title |
Maldi-tof mass spectrometry.
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 4 |
| Book title |
Pharmacogenomics
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-62703-435-7_4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-62703-434-0, 978-1-62703-435-7
|
| Authors |
Dirk van den Boom, Matthias Wjst, Robin E. Everts, Boom, Dirk van den, Wjst, Matthias, Everts, Robin E. |
| Abstract |
Major strengths of mass spectrometry analysis include the accuracy of the detection principle, automatic data storage as well as simplicity and flexibility of assay design making it a premier choice for targeted genotyping of sequence variations. We explain the assay principle in detail and give step-by-step laboratory instructions. Finally, references point toward further use of mass spectrometry analysis for molecular haplotyping, re-sequencing, and quantitative analysis for copy number variations and gene expression studies are given. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 385 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Latvia | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 375 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 78 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 69 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 57 | 15% |
| Researcher | 56 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 32 | 8% |
| Unknown | 82 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 83 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 66 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 61 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 46 | 12% |
| Unknown | 96 | 25% |
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 06 July 2013.
All research outputs
#14,628,184
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#4,597
of 13,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,404
of 280,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#163
of 341 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,079 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 280,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 341 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.