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 |
Evaluation of current algorithms for segmentation of scar tissue from late Gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance of the left atrium: an open-access grand challenge
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-15-105 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rashed Karim, R James Housden, Mayuragoban Balasubramaniam, Zhong Chen, Daniel Perry, Ayesha Uddin, Yosra Al-Beyatti, Ebrahim Palkhi, Prince Acheampong, Samantha Obom, Anja Hennemuth, YingLi Lu, Wenjia Bai, Wenzhe Shi, Yi Gao, Heinz-Otto Peitgen, Perry Radau, Reza Razavi, Allen Tannenbaum, Daniel Rueckert, Josh Cates, Tobias Schaeffter, Dana Peters, Rob MacLeod, Kawal Rhode |
| Abstract |
Late Gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can be used to visualise regions of fibrosis and scarring in the left atrium (LA) myocardium. This can be important for treatment stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and for assessment of treatment after radio frequency catheter ablation (RFCA). In this paper we present a standardised evaluation benchmarking framework for algorithms segmenting fibrosis and scar from LGE CMR images. The algorithms reported are the response to an open challenge that was put to the medical imaging community through an ISBI (IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging) workshop. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Cuba | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 190 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 21% |
| Researcher | 37 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 44 | 22% |
| Unknown | 31 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 28% |
| Engineering | 40 | 20% |
| Computer Science | 26 | 13% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 6 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 12% |
| Unknown | 43 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 November 2014.
All research outputs
#14,695,670
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#891
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,979
of 321,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#10
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,379 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 321,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.