↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Cardiac Physiology for Radiologists: Review of Relevant Physiology for Interpretation of Cardiac MR Imaging and CT
Published in
RadioGraphics, July 2015
DOI 10.1148/rg.2015140234
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cardiac computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging provide clinicians with important insights into cardiac physiology and pathology. However, not all radiologists understand the language and concepts of cardiac physiology that are used daily by cardiologists. This review article covers basic cardiac physiology as it relates to cardiac CT and MR imaging. Topics include a review of the cardiac cycle and left ventricular pressure-volume loops as they relate to different pathologic states, evaluation of cardiac function, and calculation of key parameters such as left ventricular volumes and the ejection fraction. The hemodynamics of cardiac shunts are covered, with an emphasis on factors important to cardiologists, including the ratio of pulmonary flow to systemic flow. Additionally, valvular physiologic function is reexamined, with a focus on understanding pressure gradients within the heart and also the changes associated with valvular pathologic conditions, including measurement of regurgitant fractions in patients with valvular insufficiency. Understanding these basic concepts will help radiologists tailor the reporting of cardiac studies to clinically relevant information. Online supplemental material is available for this article. (©)RSNA, 2015.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 147 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 %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 146 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 22 15%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Other 38 26%
Unknown 28 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 84 57%
Engineering 11 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 38 26%
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 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#27,892,257
of 34,545,128 outputs
Outputs from RadioGraphics
#3,368
of 3,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,637
of 280,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from RadioGraphics
#36
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,545,128 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 280,061 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.