↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative assessment of magnetic resonance derived myocardial perfusion measurements using advanced techniques: microsphere validation in an explanted pig heart system

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Quantitative assessment of magnetic resonance derived myocardial perfusion measurements using advanced techniques: microsphere validation in an explanted pig heart system
Published in
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd), October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12968-014-0082-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Schuster, Niloufar Zarinabad, Masaki Ishida, Matthew Sinclair, Jeroen PHM van den Wijngaard, Geraint Morton, Gilion LTF Hautvast, Boris Bigalke, Pepijn van Horssen, Nicolas Smith, Jos AE Spaan, Maria Siebes, Amedeo Chiribiri, Eike Nagel

Abstract

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) myocardial perfusion imaging has the potential to evolve into a method allowing full quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) in clinical routine. Multiple quantification pathways have been proposed. However at present it remains unclear which algorithm is the most accurate. An isolated perfused, magnetic resonance (MR) compatible pig heart model allows very accurate titration of MBF and in combination with high-resolution assessment of fluorescently-labeled microspheres represents a near optimal platform for validation. We sought to investigate which algorithm is most suited to quantify myocardial perfusion by CMR at 1.5 and 3 Tesla using state of the art CMR perfusion techniques and quantification algorithms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 39 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Researcher 8 19%
Lecturer 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 52%
Engineering 7 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Energy 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 7 17%

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 16 October 2014.
All research outputs
#1,687,809
of 4,507,778 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#121
of 383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,641
of 120,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Taylor & Francis Ltd)
#18
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,778 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 62nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 383 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
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 120,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.