↓ Skip to main content

Tendon-motion tracking in an ultrasound image sequence using optical-flow-based block matching

Overview of attention for article published in BioMedical Engineering OnLine, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Tendon-motion tracking in an ultrasound image sequence using optical-flow-based block matching
Published in
BioMedical Engineering OnLine, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12938-017-0335-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bo-I Chuang, Jian-Han Hsu, Li-Chieh Kuo, I-Ming Jou, Fong-Chin Su, Yung-Nien Sun

Abstract

Tendon motion, which is commonly observed using ultrasound imaging, is one of the most important features used in tendinopathy diagnosis. However, speckle noise and out-of-plane issues make the tracking process difficult. Manual tracking is usually time consuming and often yields inconsistent results between users. To automatically track tendon motion in ultrasound images, we developed a new method that combines the advantages of optical flow and multi-kernel block matching. For every pair of adjacent image frames, the optical flow is computed and used to estimate the accumulated displacement. The proposed method selects the frame interval adaptively based on this displacement. Multi-kernel block matching is then computed on the two selected frames, and, to reduce tracking errors, the detailed displacements of the frames in between are interpolated based on the optical flow results. In the experiments, cadaver data were used to evaluate the tracking results. The mean absolute error was less than 0.05 mm. The proposed method also tracked the motion of tendons in vivo, which provides useful information for clinical diagnosis. The proposed method provides a new index for adaptively determining the frame interval. Compared with other methods, the proposed method yields tracking results that are significantly more accurate.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 14 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Computer Science 2 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#18,542,806
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#564
of 824 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,617
of 310,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMedical Engineering OnLine
#6
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 824 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 310,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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.