↓ Skip to main content

Quantification of [11C]-meta-hydroxyephedrine uptake in human myocardium

Overview of attention for article published in EJNMMI Research, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Quantification of [11C]-meta-hydroxyephedrine uptake in human myocardium
Published in
EJNMMI Research, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13550-014-0052-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hendrik J Harms, Stefan de Haan, Paul Knaapen, Cornelis P Allaart, Mischa T Rijnierse, Robert C Schuit, Albert D Windhorst, Adriaan A Lammertsma, Marc C Huisman, Mark Lubberink

Abstract

The aims of this study were to determine the optimal tracer kinetic model for [(11)C]-meta-hydroxyephedrine ([(11)C]HED) and to evaluate the performance of several simplified methods. Thirty patients underwent dynamic 60-min [(11)C]HED scans with online arterial blood sampling. Single-tissue and both reversible and irreversible two-tissue models were fitted to the data using the metabolite-corrected arterial input function. For each model, reliable fits were defined as those yielding outcome parameters with a coefficient of variation (CoV) <25%. The optimal model was determined using Akaike and Schwarz criteria and the F-test, together with the number of reliable fits. Simulations were performed to study accuracy and precision of each model. Finally, quantitative results obtained using a population-averaged metabolite correction were evaluated, and simplified retention index (RI) and standardized uptake value (SUV) results were compared with quantitative volume of distribution (V T) data. The reversible two-tissue model was preferred in 75.8% of all segments, based on the Akaike information criterion. However, V T derived using the single-tissue model correlated highly with that of the two-tissue model (r (2) = 0.94, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.96) and showed higher precision (CoV of 24.6% and 89.2% for single- and two-tissue models, respectively, at 20% noise). In addition, the single-tissue model yielded reliable fits in 94.6% of all segments as compared with 77.1% for the reversible two-tissue model. A population-averaged metabolite correction could not be used in approximately 20% of the patients because of large biases in V T. RI and SUV can provide misleading results because of non-linear relationships with V T. Although the reversible two-tissue model provided the best fits, the single-tissue model was more robust and results obtained were similar. Therefore, the single-tissue model was preferred. RI showed a non-linear correlation with V T, and therefore, care has to be taken when using RI as a quantitative measure.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Physics and Astronomy 4 11%
Engineering 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 8 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 March 2021.
All research outputs
#6,491,162
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#116
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,471
of 253,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 253,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them