| Title |
Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in the Oncology Patient
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.06.004 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer H. Jordan, Ryan M. Todd, Sujethra Vasu, W. Gregory Hundley |
| Abstract |
Patients with or receiving potentially cardiotoxic treatment for cancer are susceptible to developing decrements in left ventricular mass, diastolic function, or systolic function. They may also experience valvular heart disease, pericardial disease, or intracardiac masses. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance may be used to assess cardiac anatomy, structure, and function and to characterize myocardial tissue. This combination of features facilitates the diagnosis and management of disease processes in patients with or those who have survived cancer. This report outlines and describes prior research involving cardiovascular magnetic resonance for assessing cardiovascular disease in patients with or previously having received treatment for cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 124 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 | 31 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 6% |
| Spain | 7 | 6% |
| Australia | 6 | 5% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 6 | 5% |
| Colombia | 5 | 4% |
| Mexico | 5 | 4% |
| Portugal | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 89 | 72% |
| Scientists | 18 | 15% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 130 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 13% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 37 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 62 | 48% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 47 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 22 November 2019.
All research outputs
#605,170
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
#143
of 2,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,815
of 342,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
#5
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 342,680 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.