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 |
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance compatible physical model of the left ventricle for multi-modality characterization of wall motion and hemodynamics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-015-0154-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ikechukwu U. Okafor, Arvind Santhanakrishnan, Brandon D. Chaffins, Lucia Mirabella, John N. Oshinski, Ajit P. Yoganathan |
| Abstract |
The development of clinically applicable fluid-structure interaction (FSI) models of the left heart is inherently challenging when using in vivo cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) data for validation, due to the lack of a well-controlled system where detailed measurements of the ventricular wall motion and flow field are available a priori. The purpose of this study was to (a) develop a clinically relevant, CMR-compatible left heart physical model; and (b) compare the left ventricular (LV) volume reconstructions and hemodynamic data obtained using CMR to laboratory-based experimental modalities. The LV was constructed from optically clear flexible silicone rubber. The geometry was based off a healthy patient's LV geometry during peak systole. The LV phantom was attached to a left heart simulator consisting of an aorta, atrium, and systemic resistance and compliance elements. Experiments were conducted for heart rate of 70 bpm. Wall motion measurements were obtained using high speed stereo-photogrammetry (SP) and cine-CMR, while flow field measurements were obtained using digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) and phase-contrast magnetic resonance (PC-CMR). The model reproduced physiologically accurate hemodynamics (aortic pressure = 120/80 mmHg; cardiac output = 3.5 L/min). DPIV and PC-CMR results of the center plane flow within the ventricle matched, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with flow from the atrium into the LV having a velocity of about 1.15 m/s for both modalities. The normalized LV volume through the cardiac cycle computed from CMR data matched closely to that from SP. The mean difference between CMR and SP was 5.5 ± 3.7 %. The model presented here can thus be used for the purposes of: (a) acquiring CMR data for validation of FSI simulations, (b) determining accuracy of cine-CMR reconstruction methods, and |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iraq | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 20 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,999,108
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#490
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,116
of 278,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#15
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 278,859 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.