↓ Skip to main content

Umbilical Cord Blood NOS1 as a Potential Biomarker of Neonatal Encephalopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
19 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.
Title
Umbilical Cord Blood NOS1 as a Potential Biomarker of Neonatal Encephalopathy
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fped.2017.00112
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Lei, Cristina Paules, Elisabeth Nigrini, Jason M. Rosenzweig, Rudhab Bahabry, Azadeh Farzin, Samuel Yang, Frances J. Northington, Daniel Oros, Stephanie McKenney, Michael V. Johnston, Ernest M. Graham, Irina Burd

Abstract

There are no definitive markers to aid in diagnosis of neonatal encephalopathy (NE). The purpose of our study was (1) to identify and evaluate the utility of neuronal nitric oxide synthase (NOS1) in umbilical cord blood as a NE biomarker and (2) to identify the source of NOS1 in umbilical cord blood. This was a nested case-control study of neonates >35 weeks of gestation. ELISA for NOS1 in umbilical cord blood was performed. Sources of NOS1 in umbilical cord were investigated by immunohistochemistry, western blot, ELISA, and quantitative PCR. Furthermore, umbilical cords of full-term neonates were subjected to 1% hypoxia ex vivo. NOS1 was present in umbilical cord blood and increased in NE cases compared with controls. NOS1 was expressed in endothelial cells of the umbilical cord vein, but not in artery or blood cells. In ex vivo experiments, hypoxia was associated with increased levels of NOS1 in venous endothelial cells of the umbilical cord as well as in ex vivo culture medium. This is the first study to investigate an early marker of NE. NOS1 is elevated with hypoxia, and further studies are needed to investigate it as a valuable tool for early diagnosis of neonatal brain injury.

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 37%
Psychology 2 11%
Unspecified 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,893,544
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#2,938
of 6,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,186
of 313,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#56
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 313,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.