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.
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 |
Regional Differences in End-Diastolic Volumes between 3D Echo and CMR in HLHS Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pediatrics, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fped.2016.00133 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alberto Gomez, Ozan Oktay, Daniel Rueckert, Graeme P. Penney, Julia A. Schnabel, John M. Simpson, Kuberan Pushparajah |
| Abstract |
Ultrasound is commonly thought to underestimate ventricular volumes compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), although the reason for this and the spatial distribution of the volume difference is not well understood. In this paper, we use landmark-based image registration to spatially align MRI and ultrasound images from patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome and carry out a qualitative and quantitative spatial comparison of manual segmentations of the ventricular volume obtained from the respective modalities. In our experiments, we have found a trend showing volumes estimated from ultrasound to be smaller than those obtained from MRI (by approximately up to 20 ml), and that important contributors to this difference are the presence of artifacts such as shadows in the echo images and the different criteria to include or exclude image features as part of the ventricular volume. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 19% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 31% |
| Engineering | 3 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
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 13 December 2016.
All research outputs
#6,160,952
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,025
of 6,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,434
of 418,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 418,942 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 69% of its contemporaries.