↓ Skip to main content

Metabolic imaging in exercise physiology

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
38 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.
Article details
Title
Metabolic imaging in exercise physiology
Published in
Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2017
DOI 10.1152/japplphysiol.00898.2016
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This mini-review focuses on selected, noninvasive imaging techniques that have been used in the study of exercise physiology. These imaging modalities can be roughly divided into two categories: tracer based and non-tracer based. Tracer based methods use radio-labeled substrates whose location and quantity can subsequently be imaged once they are incorporated into metabolic processes. Non-tracer based imaging modalities rely on specific properties of substrates to identify metabolites and determine their concentrations. Identification and quantification of metabolites is usually based on magnetic properties or on differences in light absorption. In this review we will highlight two tracer based imaging modalities, posititron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), as well as two non-tracer based methods, magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). Some of the recent findings each technique has provided on cerebral and skeletal muscle metabolism during exercise, as well as the strengths and limitations of each technique, will be discussed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 8 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Engineering 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,684,742
of 27,949,950 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Physiology
#2,307
of 10,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,592
of 431,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Physiology
#24
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,949,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 431,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 60% of its contemporaries.