The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Combination of Microfluidic Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification with Gold Nanoparticles for Rapid Detection of Salmonella spp. in Food Samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02159 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alejandro Garrido-Maestu, Sarah Azinheiro, Joana Carvalho, Sara Abalde-Cela, Enrique Carbó-Argibay, Lorena Diéguez, Marek Piotrowski, Yury V Kolen'ko, Marta Prado |
| Abstract |
Foodborne diseases are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. According to the World Health Organization, there are 31 main global hazards, which caused in 2010 600 million foodborne illnesses and 420000 deaths. Among them, Salmonella spp. is one of the most important human pathogens, accounting for more than 90000 cases in Europe and even more in the United States per year. In the current study we report the development, and thorough evaluation in food samples, of a microfluidic system combining loop-mediated isothermal amplification with gold nanoparticles (AuNPs). This system is intended for low-cost, in situ, detection of different pathogens, as the proposed methodology can be extrapolated to different microorganisms. A very low limit of detection (10 cfu/25 g) was obtained. Furthermore, the evaluation of spiked food samples (chicken, turkey, egg products), completely matched the expected results, as denoted by the index kappa of concordance (value of 1.00). The results obtained for the relative sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were of 100% as well as the positive and negative predictive values. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 97 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 9 | 9% |
| Engineering | 8 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 36 | 37% |
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 06 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,458,307
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,713
of 25,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,285
of 330,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#492
of 559 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 330,760 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 559 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.