↓ Skip to main content

Towards higher sensitivity and stability of axon diameter estimation with diffusion‐weighted MRI

Overview of attention for article published in NMR in Biomedicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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.
Title
Towards higher sensitivity and stability of axon diameter estimation with diffusion‐weighted MRI
Published in
NMR in Biomedicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1002/nbm.3462
Pubmed ID
Authors

Farshid Sepehrband, Daniel C Alexander, Nyoman D Kurniawan, David C Reutens, Zhengyi Yang

Abstract

Diffusion-weighted MRI is an important tool for in vivo and non-invasive axon morphometry. The ActiveAx technique utilises an optimised acquisition protocol to infer orientationally invariant indices of axon diameter and density by fitting a model of white matter to the acquired data. In this study, we investigated the factors that influence the sensitivity to small-diameter axons, namely the gradient strength of the acquisition protocol and the model fitting routine. Diffusion-weighted ex. vivo images of the mouse brain were acquired using 16.4-T MRI with high (Gmax of 300 mT/m) and ultra-high (Gmax of 1350 mT/m) gradient strength acquisitions. The estimated axon diameter indices of the mid-sagittal corpus callosum were validated using electron microscopy. In addition, a dictionary-based fitting routine was employed and evaluated. Axon diameter indices were closer to electron microscopy measures when higher gradient strengths were employed. Despite the improvement, estimated axon diameter indices (a lower bound of ~ 1.8 μm) remained higher than the measurements obtained using electron microscopy (~1.2 μm). We further observed that limitations of pulsed gradient spin echo (PGSE) acquisition sequences and axonal dispersion could also influence the sensitivity with which axon diameter indices could be estimated. Our results highlight the influence of acquisition protocol, tissue model and model fitting, in addition to gradient strength, on advanced microstructural diffusion-weighted imaging techniques. © 2016 The Authors. NMR in Biomedicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Student > Master 10 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Professor 4 5%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 18%
Engineering 11 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Physics and Astronomy 9 12%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 32%
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 11 January 2016.
All research outputs
#16,151,418
of 24,565,648 outputs
Outputs from NMR in Biomedicine
#1,074
of 1,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,715
of 404,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NMR in Biomedicine
#13
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,565,648 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,892 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 404,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.