| Title |
MRI of the lung (1/3): methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Insights into Imaging, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13244-012-0176-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. M. Wild, H. Marshall, M. Bock, L. R. Schad, P. M. Jakob, M. Puderbach, F. Molinari, E. J. R. Van Beek, J. Biederer |
| Abstract |
Proton magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has recently emerged as a clinical tool to image the lungs. This paper outlines the current technical aspects of MRI pulse sequences, radiofrequency (RF) coils and MRI system requirements needed for imaging the pulmonary parenchyma and vasculature. Lung MRI techniques are presented as a "technical toolkit", from which MR protocols will be composed in the subsequent papers for comprehensive imaging of lung disease and function (parts 2 and 3). This paper is pitched at MR scientists, technicians and radiologists who are interested in understanding and establishing lung MRI methods. Images from a 1.5 T scanner are used for illustration of the sequences and methods that are highlighted. Main Messages • Outline of the hardware and pulse sequence requirements for proton lung MRI • Overview of pulse sequences for lung parenchyma, vascular and functional imaging with protons • Demonstration of the pulse-sequence building blocks for clinical lung MRI protocols. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| Hungary | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 3 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 246 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 49 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 43 | 17% |
| Unknown | 44 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 78 | 30% |
| Engineering | 46 | 18% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 27 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 11% |
| Unknown | 53 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 02 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,420,917
of 25,397,764 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#127
of 1,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,937
of 181,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,397,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 181,089 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 99% of its contemporaries.