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 |
Coronary computed tomography angiography using ultra-low-dose contrast media: radiation dose and image quality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-013-0201-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sei Komatsu, Teruaki Kamata, Atsuko Imai, Tomoki Ohara, Mitsuhiko Takewa, Ryoko Ohe, Kazuaki Miyaji, Junichi Yoshida, Kazuhisa Kodama |
| Abstract |
To analyze the invasiveness and image quality of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) with 80 kV. We enrolled 181 patients with low body weight and low calcium level. Of these, 154 patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 280 HU/80 kV (n = 51); 350 HU/80 kV (n = 51); or 350 HU/120 kV (n = 52). The amount of contrast media (CM) was decided with a CT number-controlling system. Twenty-seven patients were excluded because of an invalid time density curve by timing bolus. The predicted amount of CM, volume CT dose index, dose-length product, effective dose, image noise, and 5-point image quality were measured. The amounts of CM for the 80 kV/280 HU, 80 kV/350 HU, and 120 kV/350 HU groups were 10 ± 4 mL, 15 ± 7 mL, and 30 ± 6 mL, respectively. Although image noise was greater at 80 than 120 kV, there was no significant difference in image quality between 80 kV/350 HU and 120 kV/350 HU (p = 0.390). There was no significant difference in image quality between 80 kV/280 HU and 80 kV/350 HU (4.4 ± 0.7 vs. 4.7 ± 0.4, p = 0.056). The amount of CM and effective dose was lower for 80 kV CCTA than for 120 kV CCTA. CCTA at 80 kV/280 HU may decrease the amount of CM and radiation dose necessary while maintaining image quality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 43% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 April 2014.
All research outputs
#15,106,857
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#606
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,951
of 205,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#6
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 205,104 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.