| Title |
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance evaluation of aortic stenosis severity using single plane measurement of effective orifice area
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1532-429x-14-23 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julio Garcia, Oscar R Marrufo, Alfredo O Rodriguez, Eric Larose, Philippe Pibarot, Lyes Kadem |
| Abstract |
Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the standard method for the evaluation of the severity of aortic stenosis (AS). Valve effective orifice area (EOA) measured by the continuity equation is one of the most frequently used stenotic indices. However, TTE measurement of aortic valve EOA is not feasible or not reliable in a significant proportion of patients. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as a non-invasive alternative to evaluate EOA using velocity measurements. The objectives of this study were: 1) to validate a new CMR method using jet shear layer detection (JSLD) based on acoustical source term (AST) concept to estimate the valve EOA; 2) to introduce a simplified JSLD method not requiring vorticity field derivation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 25% |
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 48% |
| Engineering | 13 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,233,045
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,165
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,349
of 174,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 174,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 4 of them.