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 |
Algorithm for Video Summarization of Bronchoscopy Procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-925x-10-110 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mikołaj I Leszczuk, Mariusz Duplaga |
| Abstract |
The duration of bronchoscopy examinations varies considerably depending on the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures used. It can last more than 20 minutes if a complex diagnostic work-up is included. With wide access to videobronchoscopy, the whole procedure can be recorded as a video sequence. Common practice relies on an active attitude of the bronchoscopist who initiates the recording process and usually chooses to archive only selected views and sequences. However, it may be important to record the full bronchoscopy procedure as documentation when liability issues are at stake. Furthermore, an automatic recording of the whole procedure enables the bronchoscopist to focus solely on the performed procedures. Video recordings registered during bronchoscopies include a considerable number of frames of poor quality due to blurry or unfocused images. It seems that such frames are unavoidable due to the relatively tight endobronchial space, rapid movements of the respiratory tract due to breathing or coughing, and secretions which occur commonly in the bronchi, especially in patients suffering from pulmonary disorders. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 7 | 25% |
| Engineering | 6 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 July 2012.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#371
of 867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,456
of 248,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 248,898 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.