↓ Skip to main content

Glycerophosphocholine and Glycerophosphoethanolamine Are Not the Main Sources of the In Vivo 31P MRS Phosphodiester Signals from Healthy Fibroglandular Breast Tissue at 7 T

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Glycerophosphocholine and Glycerophosphoethanolamine Are Not the Main Sources of the In Vivo 31P MRS Phosphodiester Signals from Healthy Fibroglandular Breast Tissue at 7 T
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wybe J. M. van der Kemp, Bertine L. Stehouwer, Jurgen H. Runge, Jannie P. Wijnen, Aart J. Nederveen, Peter R. Luijten, Dennis W. J. Klomp

Abstract

The identification of the phosphodiester (PDE) (31)P MR signals in the healthy human breast at ultra-high field. In vivo (31)P MRS measurements at 7 T of the PDE signals in the breast were performed investigating the chemical shifts, the transverse- and the longitudinal relaxation times. Chemical shifts and transverse relaxation times were compared with non-ambiguous PDE signals from the liver. The chemical shifts of the PDE signals are shifted -0.5 ppm with respect to glycerophosphocholine (GPC) and glycerophosphoethanolamine (GPE), and the transverse and longitudinal relaxation times for these signals are a factor 3 to 4 shorter than expected for aqueous GPC and GPE. The available experimental evidence suggests that GPC and GPE are not the main source of the PDE signals measured in fibroglandular breast tissue at 7 T. These signals may predominantly originate from mobile phospholipids.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Other 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 24%
Physics and Astronomy 2 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 47%
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 15 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,313
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,041
of 412,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#63
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 412,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.