↓ Skip to main content

Statistical methods in computational anatomy

Overview of attention for article published in Statistical Methods in Medical Research, June 1997
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
2 patents
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Statistical methods in computational anatomy
Published in
Statistical Methods in Medical Research, June 1997
DOI 10.1177/096228029700600305
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This paper reviews recent developments by the Washington/Brown groups for the study of anatomical shape in the emerging new discipline of computational anatomy. Parametric representations of anatomical variation for computational anatomy are reviewed, restricted to the assumption of small deformations. The generation of covariance operators for probabilistic measures of anatomical variation on coordinatized submanifolds is formulated as an empirical procedure. Populations of brains are mapped to common coordinate systems, from which template coordinate systems are constructed which are closest to the population of anatomies in a minimum distance sense. Variation of several one-, two- and three-dimensional manifolds, i.e. sulci, surfaces and brain volumes are examined via Gaussian measures with mean and covariances estimated directly from maps of templates to targets. Methods are presented for estimating the covariances of vector fields from a family of empirically generated maps, posed as generalized spectrum estimation indexed over the submanifolds. Covariance estimation is made parametric, analogous to autoregressive modelling, by introducing small deformation linear operators for constraining the spectrum of the fields.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 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 %
United States 4 6%
United Kingdom 3 5%
New Zealand 1 2%
Norway 1 2%
Unknown 53 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 26%
Professor 8 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 10%
Student > Master 4 6%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 13 21%
Computer Science 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Mathematics 6 10%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 8 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 August 2026.
All research outputs
#5,715,707
of 26,251,549 outputs
Outputs from Statistical Methods in Medical Research
#177
of 970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,045
of 28,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Statistical Methods in Medical Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,251,549 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 970 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 28,124 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them