| Title |
Normal values of aortic dimensions, distensibility, and pulse wave velocity in children and young adults: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-14-77 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Inga Voges, Michael Jerosch-Herold, Jürgen Hedderich, Eileen Pardun, Christopher Hart, Dominik Daniel Gabbert, Jan Hinnerk Hansen, Colin Petko, Hans-Heiner Kramer, Carsten Rickers |
| Abstract |
Aortic enlargement and impaired bioelasticity are of interest in several cardiac and non-cardiac diseases as they can lead to cardiovascular complications. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is increasingly accepted as a noninvasive tool in cardiovascular evaluation. Assessment of aortic anatomy and bioelasticity, namely aortic distensibility and pulse wave velocity (PWV), by CMR is accurate and reproducible and could help to identify anatomical and bioelastic abnormalities of the aorta. However, normal CMR values for healthy children and young adults are lacking. |
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 276 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 268 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 47 | 17% |
| Researcher | 45 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 26 | 9% |
| Other | 55 | 20% |
| Unknown | 38 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 122 | 44% |
| Engineering | 50 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 53 | 19% |
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 16 November 2012.
All research outputs
#23,069,091
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,293
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,969
of 193,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#9
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 193,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.