↓ Skip to main content

Validation of quantitative magnetic resonance imaging-based apparent bone volume fraction in peri-articular tibial bone of cadaveric knees

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

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.
Title
Validation of quantitative magnetic resonance imaging-based apparent bone volume fraction in peri-articular tibial bone of cadaveric knees
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-15-143
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey B Driban, Mary F Barbe, Mamta Amin, Neil S Kalariya, Ming Zhang, Grace H Lo, Anna M Tassinari, Daniel Harper, Lori Lyn Price, Charles B Eaton, Erika Schneider, Timothy E McAlindon

Abstract

In the knee, high-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has demonstrated that increased apparent bone volume fraction (trabecular bone volume per total volume; BV/TV) in the peri-articular proximal medial tibia is associated with joint space narrowing and the presence of bone marrow lesions. However, despite evidence of construct validity, MR-based apparent BV/TV has not yet been cross-validated in the proximal medial tibia by comparison with a gold standard (e.g., micro-computed tomography [microCT]). In this cadaveric validation study we explored the association between MR-based apparent BV/TV and microCT-based BV/TV in the proximal peri-articular medial tibia.

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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 10 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 29 April 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,293
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,123
of 4,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,501
of 227,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#83
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 227,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 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.