↓ Skip to main content

Value of Semiquantitative Analysis for Clinical Reporting of123I-2-β-Carbomethoxy-3β-(4-Iodophenyl)-N-(3-Fluoropropyl)Nortropane SPECT Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nuclear Medicine, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Value of Semiquantitative Analysis for Clinical Reporting of123I-2-β-Carbomethoxy-3β-(4-Iodophenyl)-N-(3-Fluoropropyl)Nortropane SPECT Studies
Published in
Journal of Nuclear Medicine, March 2013
DOI 10.2967/jnumed.112.110106
Pubmed ID
Authors

Therese A. Söderlund, John C. Dickson, Elizabeth Prvulovich, Simona Ben-Haim, Paul Kemp, Jan Booij, Flavio Nobili, Gerda Thomsen, Osama Sabri, Pierre-Malik Koulibaly, Ozgur U Akdemir, Marco Pagani, Koen van Laere, Susanne Asenbaum-Nan, Jean George, Terez Sera, Klaus Tatsch, Jamshed Bomanji

Abstract

Clinical (123)I-2-β-carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane ((123)I-FP-CIT) SPECT studies are commonly performed and reported using visual evaluation of tracer binding, an inherently subjective method. Increased objectivity can potentially be obtained using semiquantitative analysis. In this study, we assessed whether semiquantitative analysis of (123)I-FP-CIT tracer binding created more reproducible clinical reporting. A secondary aim was to determine in what form semiquantitative data should be provided to the reporter.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 6 18%
Other 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 52%
Neuroscience 5 15%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 March 2013.
All research outputs
#20,185,720
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
#3,413
of 4,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,811
of 196,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
#51
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,064 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 196,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.