↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Probing the microscopic environment of 23Na ions in brain tissue by MRI: On the accuracy of different sampling schemes for the determination of rapid, biexponential decay at low signal‐to‐noise ratio
Published in
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1002/mrm.27059
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To investigate and to reduce influences on the determination of the short and long apparent transverse relaxation times ( T2,s*, T2,l*) of 23 Na in vivo with respect to signal sampling. The accuracy of T2* determination was analyzed in simulations for five different sampling schemes. The influence of noise in the parameter fit was investigated for three different models. A dedicated sampling scheme was developed for brain parenchyma by numerically optimizing the parameter estimation. This scheme was compared in vivo to linear sampling at 7T. For the considered sampling schemes, T2,s* / T2,l* exhibit an average bias of 3% / 4% with a variation of 25% / 15% based on simulations with previously published T2* values. The accuracy could be improved with the optimized sampling scheme by strongly averaging the earliest sample. A fitting model with constant noise floor can increase accuracy while additional fitting of a noise term is only beneficial in case of sampling until late echo time > 80 ms. T2* values in white matter were determined to be T2,s* = 5.1 ± 0.8 / 4.2 ± 0.4 ms and T2,l* = 35.7 ± 2.4 / 34.4 ± 1.5 ms using linear/optimized sampling. Voxel-wise T2* determination of 23 Na is feasible in vivo. However, sampling and fitting methods have to be chosen carefully to retrieve accurate results. Magn Reson Med, 2018. © 2018 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 39%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 4 22%
Engineering 4 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#21,946,049
of 24,484,013 outputs
Outputs from Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
#6,315
of 7,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#388,104
of 451,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
#59
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,484,013 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 7,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. 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 451,084 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 98 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.