↓ Skip to main content

Reference ranges for cardiac structure and function using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in Caucasians from the UK Biobank population cohort

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
416 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
362 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
Reference ranges for cardiac structure and function using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in Caucasians from the UK Biobank population cohort
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12968-017-0327-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steffen E. Petersen, Nay Aung, Mihir M. Sanghvi, Filip Zemrak, Kenneth Fung, Jose Miguel Paiva, Jane M. Francis, Mohammed Y. Khanji, Elena Lukaschuk, Aaron M. Lee, Valentina Carapella, Young Jin Kim, Paul Leeson, Stefan K. Piechnik, Stefan Neubauer

Abstract

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is the gold standard method for the assessment of cardiac structure and function. Reference ranges permit differentiation between normal and pathological states. To date, this study is the largest to provide CMR specific reference ranges for left ventricular, right ventricular, left atrial and right atrial structure and function derived from truly healthy Caucasian adults aged 45-74. Five thousand sixty-five UK Biobank participants underwent CMR using steady-state free precession imaging at 1.5 Tesla. Manual analysis was performed for all four cardiac chambers. Participants with non-Caucasian ethnicity, known cardiovascular disease and other conditions known to affect cardiac chamber size and function were excluded. Remaining participants formed the healthy reference cohort; reference ranges were calculated and were stratified by gender and age (45-54, 55-64, 65-74). After applying exclusion criteria, 804 (16.2%) participants were available for analysis. Left ventricular (LV) volumes were larger in males compared to females for absolute and indexed values. With advancing age, LV volumes were mostly smaller in both sexes. LV ejection fraction was significantly greater in females compared to males (mean ± standard deviation [SD] of 61 ± 5% vs 58 ± 5%) and remained static with age for both genders. In older age groups, LV mass was lower in men, but remained virtually unchanged in women. LV mass was significantly higher in males compared to females (mean ± SD of 53 ± 9 g/m(2) vs 42 ± 7 g/m(2)). Right ventricular (RV) volumes were significantly larger in males compared to females for absolute and indexed values and were smaller with advancing age. RV ejection fraction was higher with increasing age in females only. Left atrial (LA) maximal volume and stroke volume were significantly larger in males compared to females for absolute values but not for indexed values. LA ejection fraction was similar for both sexes. Right atrial (RA) maximal volume was significantly larger in males for both absolute and indexed values, while RA ejection fraction was significantly higher in females. We describe age- and sex-specific reference ranges for the left ventricle, right ventricle and atria in the largest validated normal Caucasian population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 362 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 361 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 20%
Researcher 61 17%
Student > Master 36 10%
Other 32 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 5%
Other 62 17%
Unknown 79 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 158 44%
Engineering 36 10%
Computer Science 19 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 2%
Other 32 9%
Unknown 101 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 23 April 2024.
All research outputs
#2,163,859
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#81
of 1,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,760
of 428,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#2
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 428,873 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.