↓ Skip to main content

Utilization of MR angiography in perfusion imaging for identifying arterial input function

Overview of attention for article published in Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Utilization of MR angiography in perfusion imaging for identifying arterial input function
Published in
Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10334-017-0643-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bora Buyuksarac, Mehmed Ozkan

Abstract

This research utilizes magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) to identify arterial locations during the parametric evaluation of concentration time curves (CTCs), and to prevent shape distortions in arterial input function (AIF). We carried out cluster analysis with the CTC parameters of voxels located within and around the middle cerebral artery (MCA). Through MRA, we located voxels that meet the AIF criteria and those with distorted CTCs. To minimize partial volume effect, we re-scaled the time integral of CTCs by the time integral of venous output function (VOF). We calculated the steady-state value to area under curve ratio (SS:AUC) of VOF and used it as a reference in selecting AIF. CTCs close to this reference value (selected AIF) and those far from it were used (eliminated AIF) to compute cerebral blood flow (CBF). Eliminated AIFs were found to be either on or anterior to MCA, whereas selected AIFs were located superior, inferior, posterior, or anterior to MCA. If the SS:AUC of AIF was far from the reference value, CBF was either under- or over-estimated by a maximum of 41.1 ± 14.3 and 36.6 ± 19.2%, respectively. MRA enables excluding voxels on the MCA during cluster analysis, and avoiding the risk of shape distortions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 33%
Unspecified 1 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 2 33%
Neuroscience 1 17%
Unspecified 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,405,036
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine
#304
of 492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,570
of 318,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 492 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 318,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.