| Title |
Semi‐automated biobank sample processing with a 384 high density sample tube robot used in cancer and cardiovascular studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Medicine, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40169-015-0067-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Johan Malm, Henrik Lindberg, David Erlinge, Roger Appelqvist, Maria Yakovleva, Charlotte Welinder, Erik Steinfelder, Thomas E Fehniger, György Marko-Varga |
| Abstract |
In the postgenomic era, it has become evident that analysis of genetic and protein expression changes alone is not sufficient to understand most disease processes in e.g. cardiovascular and cancer disease. Biobanking has been identified as an important area for development and discovery of better diagnostic tools and new treatment modalities. Biobanks are developed in order to integrate the collection of clinical samples from both healthy individuals and patients and provide valuable information that will make possible improved patient care. Modern healthcare developments are intimately linked to information based on studies of patient samples from biobank archives in large scale studies. Today biobanks form important national, as well as international, networks that share and combine global resources. We have developed and validated a novel biobanking workflow process that utilizes 384-tube systems with a high speed sample array robot with unique processing principles. The 384-tube format and robotic processing is incorporated into a cancer and cardiovascular diagnostic/prognostic research program with therapeutic interventions. Our biobank practice has gained acceptance within many hospitals and research units and is based on high-density sample storage with small aliquot sample volumes. The previous standard of 5-10 mL sample volume tubes is being replaced by smaller volumes of 50-70 μL blood fractions that typically result in hundreds of thousands of aliquot fractions in 384-tube systems. Our novel biobanking workflow process is robust and well suited for clinical studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 91% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 393 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 391 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 54 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 42 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 40 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 35 | 9% |
| Other | 88 | 22% |
| Unknown | 86 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 12% |
| Engineering | 40 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 26 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 22 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 132 | 34% |
| Unknown | 105 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#6,496,106
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#251
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,450
of 276,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 276,630 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.