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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Free-breathing T2* mapping using respiratory motion corrected averaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-014-0106-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Kellman, Hui Xue, Bruce S Spottiswoode, Christopher M Sandino, Michael S Hansen, Amna Abdel-Gadir, Thomas A Treibel, Stefania Rosmini, Christine Mancini, W Patricia Bandettini, Laura-Ann McGill, Peter Gatehouse, James C Moon, Dudley J Pennell, Andrew E Arai |
| Abstract |
Pixel-wise T2* maps based on breath-held segmented image acquisition are prone to ghost artifacts in instances of poor breath-holding or cardiac arrhythmia. Single shot imaging is inherently immune to ghost type artifacts. We propose a free-breathing method based on respiratory motion corrected single shot imaging with averaging to improve the signal to noise ratio. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 30% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 34% |
| Engineering | 8 | 17% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 6 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
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 17 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,947,998
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,197
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,843
of 361,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#36
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 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 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 361,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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.