↓ Skip to main content

A new noninvasive technique for estimating hepatic triglyceride: will liver biopsy become redundant in diagnosing non-alcoholic fatty liver disease?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
A new noninvasive technique for estimating hepatic triglyceride: will liver biopsy become redundant in diagnosing non-alcoholic fatty liver disease?
Published in
BMC Medicine, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0152-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bark Betzel, Joost PH Drenth

Abstract

Obesity and metabolic syndrome are healthcare problems that continue to rise in frequency worldwide. Both phenotypes are a strong predictor for development of liver steatosis in the context of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease or non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Ultrasound may detect steatosis, but its sensitivity is limited and liver biopsy is still considered to be the gold standard. Less invasive techniques that accurately quantify liver steatosis are warranted. Jiménez-Agüero and colleagues propose that multi-echo magnetic resonance imaging might be such a diagnostic tool. They validated multi-echo magnetic resonance imaging with measured hepatic triglyceride concentration. Their results show that this innovative technique measures the grade of steatosis in different clinical situations. Therefore, multi-echo magnetic resonance imaging might be considered for monitoring liver steatosis as an intermediate endpoint. Wide clinical applicability is limited though, as it does not allow differentiation between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 6 24%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 24%
Engineering 3 12%
Psychology 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 1 4%
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 27 August 2014.
All research outputs
#20,235,415
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#3,311
of 3,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,124
of 236,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#68
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 236,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 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.