| Title |
Imaging for the Diagnosis and Management of Traumatic Brain Injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurotherapeutics, January 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13311-010-0003-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jane J. Kim, Alisa D. Gean |
| Abstract |
To understand the role of imaging in traumatic brain injury (TBI), it is important to appreciate that TBI encompasses a heterogeneous group of intracranial injuries and includes both insults at the time of impact and a deleterious secondary cascade of insults that require optimal medical and surgical management. Initial imaging identifies the acute primary insult that is essential to diagnosing TBI, but serial imaging surveillance is also critical to identifying secondary injuries such as cerebral herniation and swelling that guide neurocritical management. Computed tomography (CT) is the mainstay of TBI imaging in the acute setting, but magnetic resonance tomography (MRI) has better diagnostic sensitivity for nonhemorrhagic contusions and shear-strain injuries. Both CT and MRI can be used to prognosticate clinical outcome, and there is particular interest in advanced applications of both techniques that may greatly improve the sensitivity of conventional CT and MRI for both the diagnosis and prognosis of TBI. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 282 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 13% |
| Researcher | 32 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 10% |
| Other | 28 | 10% |
| Other | 60 | 21% |
| Unknown | 65 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 119 | 41% |
| Neuroscience | 18 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 6% |
| Engineering | 12 | 4% |
| Psychology | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 38 | 13% |
| Unknown | 77 | 27% |
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 11 December 2012.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#771
of 1,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,196
of 191,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 191,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.