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 |
Modified look-locker inversion recovery T1 mapping indices: assessment of accuracy and reproducibility between magnetic resonance scanners
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-15-64 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fabio S Raman, Nadine Kawel-Boehm, Neville Gai, Melanie Freed, Jing Han, Chia-Ying Liu, Joao AC Lima, David A Bluemke, Songtao Liu |
| Abstract |
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping indices, such as T1 time and partition coefficient (λ), have shown potential to assess diffuse myocardial fibrosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate how scanner and field strength variation affect the accuracy and precision/reproducibility of T1 mapping indices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 99 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 33 | 31% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 52% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 12 | 11% |
| Engineering | 9 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 November 2020.
All research outputs
#8,400,315
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#676
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,996
of 210,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
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 7.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 210,637 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.