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 |
Sampling rate dependence of correlation at long time lags in BOLD fMRI measurements on humans and gel phantoms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2013.00106 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaare B. Mikkelsen, Torben E. Lund |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of sampling rate on Hurst exponents derived from Blood Oxygenation Level Dependent functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (BOLD fMRI) resting state time series. fMRI measurements were performed on 2 human subjects and a selection of gel phantoms. From these, Hurst exponents were calculated. It was found that low sampling rates induced non-trivial exponents at sharp material transitions, and that Hurst exponents of human measurements had a strong TR-dependence. The findings are compared to theoretical considerations regarding the fractional Gaussian noise model and resampling, and it is found that the implications are problematic. This result should have a direct influence on the way future studies of low-frequency variation in BOLD fMRI data are conducted, especially if the fractional Gaussian noise model is considered. We recommend either using a different model (examples of such are referenced in the conclusion), or standardizing experimental procedures along an optimal sampling rate. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Denmark | 1 | 6% |
| Italy | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 81% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 19% |
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 19% |
| Psychology | 2 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
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 20 May 2013.
All research outputs
#20,194,150
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,301
of 13,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,752
of 280,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#243
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 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 13,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 280,736 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 398 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.