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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Diffuse myocardial fibrosis evaluation using cardiac magnetic resonance T1 mapping: sample size considerations for clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-14-90 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Songtao Liu, Jing Han, Marcelo S Nacif, Jacquin Jones, Nadine Kawel, Peter Kellman, Christopher T Sibley, David A Bluemke |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 94 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 31 | 31% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 20% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 53% |
| Engineering | 15 | 15% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 12% |
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 28 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,498,555
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,086
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,720
of 290,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#15
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 290,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 57% of its contemporaries.