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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Mapping iron in human heart tissue with synchrotron x-ray fluorescence microscopy and cardiovascular magnetic resonance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-014-0080-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael J House, Adam J Fleming, Martin D de Jonge, David Paterson, Daryl L Howard, John-Paul Carpenter, Dudley J Pennell, Tim G St Pierre |
| Abstract |
MRI assessment of cardiac iron is particularly important for assessing transfusion-dependent anaemia patients. However, comparing the iron distribution from histology or bulk samples to MRI is not ideal. Non-destructive, high-resolution imaging of post-mortem samples offers the ability to examine iron distributions across large samples at resolutions closer to those used in MRI. The aim of this ex vivo case study was to compare synchrotron X-ray fluorescence microscopy (XFM) elemental iron maps with magnetic resonance transverse relaxation rate maps of cardiac tissue samples from an iron-loaded patient. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 27% |
| Thailand | 1 | 9% |
| Brazil | 1 | 9% |
| Australia | 1 | 9% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 64% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 36% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 36% |
| Engineering | 2 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
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 24 November 2014.
All research outputs
#6,442,821
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#432
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,433
of 264,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#6
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 264,509 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.