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 |
The power-proportion method for intracranial volume correction in volumetric imaging analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2014.00356 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dawei Liu, Hans J. Johnson, Jeffrey D. Long, Vincent A. Magnotta, Jane S. Paulsen |
| Abstract |
In volumetric brain imaging analysis, volumes of brain structures are typically assumed to be proportional or linearly related to intracranial volume (ICV). However, evidence abounds that many brain structures have power law relationships with ICV. To take this relationship into account in volumetric imaging analysis, we propose a power law based method-the power-proportion method-for ICV correction. The performance of the new method is demonstrated using data from the PREDICT-HD study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 38 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 34% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,517,992
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,607
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,236
of 276,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#83
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 276,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.