↓ Skip to main content

Semi-Automated Analysis of Diaphragmatic Motion with Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Healthy Controls and Non-Ambulant Subjects with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
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
Semi-Automated Analysis of Diaphragmatic Motion with Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Healthy Controls and Non-Ambulant Subjects with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Courtney A. Bishop, Valeria Ricotti, Christopher D. J. Sinclair, Matthew R. B. Evans, Jordan W. Butler, Jasper M. Morrow, Michael G. Hanna, Paul M. Matthews, Tarek A. Yousry, Francesco Muntoni, John S. Thornton, Rexford D. Newbould, Robert L. Janiczek

Abstract

Subjects with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) suffer from progressive muscle damage leading to diaphragmatic weakness that ultimately requires ventilation. Emerging treatments have generated interest in better characterizing the natural history of respiratory impairment in DMD and responses to therapy. Dynamic (cine) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) may provide a more sensitive measure of diaphragm function in DMD than the commonly used spirometry. This study presents an analysis pipeline for measuring parameters of diaphragmatic motion from dynamic MRI and its application to investigate MRI measures of respiratory function in both healthy controls and non-ambulant DMD boys. We scanned 13 non-ambulant DMD boys and 10 age-matched healthy male volunteers at baseline, with a subset (n = 10, 10, 8) of the DMD subjects also assessed 3, 6, and 12 months later. Spirometry-derived metrics including forced vital capacity were recorded. The MRI-derived measures included the lung cross-sectional area (CSA), the anterior, central, and posterior lung lengths in the sagittal imaging plane, and the diaphragm length over the time-course of the dynamic MRI. Regression analyses demonstrated strong linear correlations between lung CSA and the length measures over the respiratory cycle, with a reduction of these correlations in DMD, and diaphragmatic motions that contribute less efficiently to changing lung capacity in DMD. MRI measures of pulmonary function were reduced in DMD, controlling for height differences between the groups: at maximal inhalation, the maximum CSA and the total distance of motion of the diaphragm were 45% and 37% smaller. MRI measures of pulmonary function were correlated with spirometry data and showed relationships with disease progression surrogates of age and months non-ambulatory, suggesting that they provide clinically meaningful information. Changes in the MRI measures over 12 months were consistent with weakening of diaphragmatic and inter-costal muscles and progressive diaphragm dysfunction. In contrast, longitudinal changes were not seen in conventional spirometry measures during the same period. Dynamic MRI measures of thoracic muscle and pulmonary function are, therefore, believed to detect meaningful differences between healthy controls and DMD and may be sensitive to changes in function over relatively short periods of follow-up in non-ambulant boys with DMD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 33%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Master 2 7%
Professor 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 27%
Engineering 3 10%
Psychology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 8 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,104,368
of 24,733,536 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#1,860
of 13,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,794
of 450,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#23
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,733,536 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 450,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.