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 |
Non-contrast coronary artery wall and plaque imaging using inversion-recovery prepared steady-state free precession
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Imaging, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12880-015-0071-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Takeshi Ishimoto, Yasuyo Taniguchi, Tosiaki Miyati, Momoe Kawakami, Masaru Ishihara |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to investigate whether three-dimensional (3D) single inversion-recovery prepared steady-state free precession (IR-SSFP) could characterize the coronary artery wall. IR-SSFP was scanned on a 1.5-T MR scanner with a five element cardiac coil. One hundred and twenty-one subjects with known or suspected coronary artery disease who had undergone X-ray coronary angiography (XCA) underwent coronary artery wall imaging using IR-SSFP sequences. In each coronary segment, the detection of the coronary wall was categorized, and contrast (signal of plaque minus signal of blood in the aorta divided by the signal of plaque plus signal of blood in the aorta) was calculated. 422 of 517 segments (82 %) were successfully visualized, and the detection scores tended to be higher at the proximal coronary artery when compared with other segments of the coronary artery. High contrast (contrast ≥ 0.75) areas were observed in 62 of 218 segments with ≥50 % coronary artery stenosis by XCA but also in 25 of 299 segments without ≥50 % coronary stenosis. IR-SSFP provided good visualization of the coronary wall. This approach represents a promising noninvasive strategy for the assessment of the coronary artery wall. |
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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 22% |
| Researcher | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
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 25 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,340,815
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#265
of 596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,781
of 263,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 263,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.