↓ Skip to main content

Improved Neuroimaging Atlas of the Dentate Nucleus

Overview of attention for article published in Cerebellum, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Improved Neuroimaging Atlas of the Dentate Nucleus
Published in
Cerebellum, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12311-017-0872-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naying He, Jason Langley, Daniel E. Huddleston, Huawei Ling, Hongmin Xu, Chunlei Liu, Fuhua Yan, Xiaoping P. Hu

Abstract

The dentate nucleus (DN) of the cerebellum is the major output nucleus of the cerebellum and is rich in iron. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) provides better iron-sensitive MRI contrast to delineate the boundary of the DN than either T2-weighted images or susceptibility-weighted images. Prior DN atlases used T2-weighted or susceptibility-weighted images to create DN atlases. Here, we employ QSM images to develop an improved dentate nucleus atlas for use in imaging studies. The DN was segmented in QSM images from 38 healthy volunteers. The resulting DN masks were transformed to a common space and averaged to generate the DN atlas. The center of mass of the left and right sides of the QSM-based DN atlas in the Montreal Neurological Institute space was -13.8, -55.8, and -36.4 mm, and 13.8, -55.7, and -36.4 mm, respectively. The maximal probability and mean probability of the DN atlas with the individually segmented DNs in this cohort were 100 and 39.3%, respectively, in contrast to the maximum probability of approximately 75% and the mean probability of 23.4 to 33.7% with earlier DN atlases. Using QSM, which provides superior iron-sensitive MRI contrast for delineating iron-rich structures, an improved atlas for the dentate nucleus has been generated. The atlas can be applied to investigate the role of the DN in both normal cortico-cerebellar physiology and the variety of disease states in which it is implicated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 29%
Unspecified 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 4 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Engineering 4 29%
Psychology 1 7%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Other 0 0%

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 02 July 2017.
All research outputs
#8,786,209
of 11,414,199 outputs
Outputs from Cerebellum
#353
of 602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,562
of 260,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cerebellum
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,414,199 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 602 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 260,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.