↓ Skip to main content

Dynamic MR Imaging Patterns of Cerebral Fat Embolism: A Systematic Review with Illustrative Cases

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Neuroradiology, May 2013
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
37 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Dynamic MR Imaging Patterns of Cerebral Fat Embolism: A Systematic Review with Illustrative Cases
Published in
American Journal of Neuroradiology, May 2013
DOI 10.3174/ajnr.a3605
Pubmed ID
Authors

K.- H. Kuo, Y.- J. Pan, Y.- J. Lai, W.- K. Cheung, F.- C. Chang, J. Jarosz

Abstract

Different MR imaging patterns of cerebral fat embolism have been reported in the literature without a systematic review. Our goal was to describe the patterns, explore the relationship between disease course and the imaging patterns, and discuss the underlying mechanism. We reveal 5 distinctive MR imaging patterns: 1) scattered embolic ischemia occurring dominantly at the acute stage; 2) confluent symmetric cytotoxic edema located at the cerebral white matter, which mainly occurs at the subacute stage; 3) vasogenic edematous lesions also occurring at the subacute stage; 4) petechial hemorrhage, which persists from the acute to the chronic stage; and 5) chronic sequelae, occurring at late stage, including cerebral atrophy, demyelinating change, and sequelae of infarction or necrosis. Underlying mechanisms of these imaging patterns are further discussed. Recognition of the 5 evolving MR imaging patterns of cerebral fat embolism may result in adjustment of the appropriate management and improve the outcome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 38 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Unspecified 4 10%
Other 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 73%
Unspecified 7 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 May 2019.
All research outputs
#664,730
of 13,041,087 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#57
of 3,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,467
of 188,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#1
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,041,087 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,284 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 188,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.