↓ Skip to main content

What Have We Learned from MR Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis?

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Neuroradiology, January 2018
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
What Have We Learned from MR Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis?
Published in
American Journal of Neuroradiology, January 2018
DOI 10.3174/ajnr.a5504
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Lapointe, D.K.B. Li, A.L. Traboulsee, A. Rauscher

Abstract

Using MR imaging, perfusion can be assessed either by dynamic susceptibility contrast MR imaging or arterial spin-labeling. Alterations of cerebral perfusion have repeatedly been described in multiple sclerosis compared with healthy controls. Acute lesions exhibit relative hyperperfusion in comparison with normal-appearing white matter, a finding mostly attributed to inflammation in this stage of lesion development. In contrast, normal-appearing white and gray matter of patients with MS has been mostly found to be hypoperfused compared with controls, and correlations with cognitive impairment as well as fatigue in multiple sclerosis have been described. Mitochondrial failure, axonal degeneration, and vascular dysfunction have been hypothesized to underlie the perfusion MR imaging findings. Clinically, perfusion MR imaging could allow earlier detection of the acute focal inflammatory changes underlying relapses and new lesions, and could constitute a marker for cognitive dysfunction in MS. Nevertheless, the clinical relevance and pathogenesis of the brain perfusion changes in MS remain to be clarified.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 19%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 25 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 25%
Neuroscience 18 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 35 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 26 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,708,551
of 23,837,558 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#235
of 5,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,942
of 446,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#6
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,837,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,025 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 446,830 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 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 94% of its contemporaries.