↓ Skip to main content

Looking and listening to light: the evolution of whole-body photonic imaging

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Biotechnology, March 2005
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
patent
17 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
1405 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
679 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Looking and listening to light: the evolution of whole-body photonic imaging
Published in
Nature Biotechnology, March 2005
DOI 10.1038/nbt1074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vasilis Ntziachristos, Jorge Ripoll, Lihong V Wang, Ralph Weissleder

Abstract

Optical imaging of live animals has grown into an important tool in biomedical research as advances in photonic technology and reporter strategies have led to widespread exploration of biological processes in vivo. Although much attention has been paid to microscopy, macroscopic imaging has allowed small-animal imaging with larger fields of view (from several millimeters to several centimeters depending on implementation). Photographic methods have been the mainstay for fluorescence and bioluminescence macroscopy in whole animals, but emphasis is shifting to photonic methods that use tomographic principles to noninvasively image optical contrast at depths of several millimeters to centimeters with high sensitivity and sub-millimeter to millimeter resolution. Recent theoretical and instrumentation advances allow the use of large data sets and multiple projections and offer practical systems for quantitative, three-dimensional whole-body images. For photonic imaging to fully realize its potential, however, further progress will be needed in refining optical inversion methods and data acquisition techniques.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 679 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 2%
Germany 8 1%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
China 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Finland 2 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Other 9 1%
Unknown 628 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 192 28%
Researcher 148 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 57 8%
Student > Master 57 8%
Student > Postgraduate 31 5%
Other 112 16%
Unknown 82 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 145 21%
Physics and Astronomy 125 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 90 13%
Chemistry 61 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 53 8%
Other 111 16%
Unknown 94 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 17 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,001,597
of 23,299,593 outputs
Outputs from Nature Biotechnology
#2,787
of 8,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,055
of 60,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Biotechnology
#8
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,299,593 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 60,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.