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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A cortical vascular model for examining the specificity of the laminar BOLD signal
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
NeuroImage, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.02.073 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Irati Markuerkiaga, Markus Barth, David G Norris |
| Abstract |
Blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) functional MRI has been used for inferring layer specific activation in humans. However, intracortical veins perpendicular to the cortical surface are suspected to degrade the laminar specificity as they drain blood from the microvasculature and BOLD signal is carried over from lower to upper cortical layers on its way to the pial surface. In this work, a vascular model of the cortex is developed to investigate the laminar specificity of the BOLD signal for Spin Echo (SE) and Gradient Echo (GE) following the integrative model presented by (Uludağ et al., 2009). The results of the simulation show that the laminar point spread function (PSF) of the BOLD signal presents similar features across all layers. The PSF for SE is highly localised whereas for GE there is a flat tail running to the pial surface, with amplitude less than a quarter of the response from the layer itself. Consequently the GE response at any layer will also contain a contribution accumulated from all lower layers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 29% |
| Researcher | 26 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Professor | 12 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 25 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 46 | 34% |
| Psychology | 12 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 11 | 8% |
| Engineering | 9 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 10% |
| Unknown | 35 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#8,186,806
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#6,434
of 12,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,406
of 313,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#116
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 313,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.