↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility and safety of high-dose adenosine perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Feasibility and safety of high-dose adenosine perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1532-429x-12-66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Theodoros D Karamitsos, Ntobeko AB Ntusi, Jane M Francis, Cameron J Holloway, Saul G Myerson, Stefan Neubauer

Abstract

Adenosine is the most widely used vasodilator stress agent for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) perfusion studies. With the standard dose of 140 mcg/kg/min some patients fail to demonstrate characteristic haemodynamic changes: a significant increase in heart rate (HR) and mild decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP). Whether an increase in the rate of adenosine infusion would improve peripheral and, likely, coronary vasodilatation in those patients is unknown. The aim of the present study was to assess the tolerance and safety of a high-dose adenosine protocol in patients with inadequate haemodynamic response to the standard adenosine protocol when undergoing CMR perfusion imaging.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 77 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 17%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 7 9%
Other 20 24%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Engineering 3 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 December 2022.
All research outputs
#16,282,309
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,006
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,616
of 101,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 7.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 101,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.