↓ Skip to main content

The Age-Related Perfusion Pattern Measured With Arterial Spin Labeling MRI in Healthy Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
The Age-Related Perfusion Pattern Measured With Arterial Spin Labeling MRI in Healthy Subjects
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2018.00214
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nan Zhang, Marc L. Gordon, Yilong Ma, Bradley Chi, Jesus J. Gomar, Shichun Peng, Peter B. Kingsley, David Eidelberg, Terry E. Goldberg

Abstract

Aim: To analyze age-related cerebral blood flow (CBF) using arterial spin labeling (ASL) MRI in healthy subjects with multivariate principal component analysis (PCA). Methods: 50 healthy subjects (mean age 45.8 ± 18.5 years, range 21-85) had 3D structural MRI and pseudo-continuous ASL MRI at resting state. The relationship between CBF and age was examined with voxel-based univariate analysis using multiple regression and two-sample t-test (median age 41.8 years as a cut-off). An age-related CBF pattern was identified using multivariate PCA. Results: Age correlated negatively with CBF especially anteriorly and in the cerebellum. After adjusting by global value, CBF was relatively decreased with aging in certain regions and relatively increased in others. The age-related CBF pattern showed relative reductions in frontal and parietal areas and cerebellum, and covarying increases in temporal and occipital areas. Subject scores of this pattern correlated negatively with age (R2 = 0.588; P < 0.001) and discriminated between the older and younger subgroups (P < 0.001). Conclusion: A distinct age-related CBF pattern can be identified with multivariate PCA using ASL MRI.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 29 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 14%
Psychology 3 5%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 38 58%
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 25 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,527,576
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#4,363
of 4,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,121
of 296,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#92
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,871 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 296,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 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.