↓ Skip to main content

Imaging as a biomarker in drug discovery for Alzheimer’s disease: is MRI a suitable technology?

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Imaging as a biomarker in drug discovery for Alzheimer’s disease: is MRI a suitable technology?
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/alzrt276
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emilio Merlo Pich, Andreas Jeromin, Giovanni B Frisoni, Derek Hill, Andrew Lockhart, Mark E Schmidt, Martin R Turner, Stefania Mondello, William Z Potter

Abstract

This review provides perspectives on the utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a neuroimaging approach in the development of novel treatments for Alzheimer's disease. These considerations were generated in a roundtable at a recent Wellcome Trust meeting that included experts from academia and industry. It was agreed that MRI, either structural or functional, could be used as a diagnostic, for assessing worsening of disease status, for monitoring vascular pathology, and for stratifying clinical trial populations. It was agreed also that MRI implementation is in its infancy, requiring more evidence of association with the disease states, test-retest data, better standardization across multiple clinical sites, and application in multimodal approaches which include other imaging technologies, such as positron emission tomography, electroencephalography, and magnetoencephalography.

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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 57 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 28%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Psychology 5 8%
Engineering 4 7%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 13 22%
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 11 August 2014.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#1,347
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,815
of 239,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 239,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.