↓ Skip to main content

Neuroimaging in repetitive brain trauma

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 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
Neuroimaging in repetitive brain trauma
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/alzrt239
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas SC Ng, Alexander P Lin, Inga K Koerte, Ofer Pasternak, Huijun Liao, Sai Merugumala, Sylvain Bouix, Martha E Shenton

Abstract

Sports-related concussions are one of the major causes of mild traumatic brain injury. Although most patients recover completely within days to weeks, those who experience repetitive brain trauma (RBT) may be at risk for developing a condition known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). While this condition is most commonly observed in athletes who experience repetitive concussive and/or subconcussive blows to the head, such as boxers, football players, or hockey players, CTE may also affect soldiers on active duty. Currently, the only means by which to diagnose CTE is by the presence of phosphorylated tau aggregations post-mortem. Non-invasive neuroimaging, however, may allow early diagnosis as well as improve our understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of RBT. The purpose of this article is to review advanced neuroimaging methods used to investigate RBT, including diffusion tensor imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, functional magnetic resonance imaging, susceptibility weighted imaging, and positron emission tomography. While there is a considerable literature using these methods in brain injury in general, the focus of this review is on RBT and those subject populations currently known to be susceptible to RBT, namely athletes and soldiers. Further, while direct detection of CTE in vivo has not yet been achieved, all of the methods described in this review provide insight into RBT and will likely lead to a better characterization (diagnosis), in vivo, of CTE than measures of self-report.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 154 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 17%
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 11%
Student > Master 14 9%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 27 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 24%
Neuroscience 22 14%
Psychology 18 11%
Sports and Recreations 16 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 40 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 May 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#1,397
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,625
of 237,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 237,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.