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 |
Automated interpretation of ANCA patterns - a new approach in the serology of ANCA-associated vasculitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Arthritis Research & Therapy, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/ar4119 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ilka Knütter, Rico Hiemann, Therese Brumma, Thomas Büttner, Kai Großmann, Marco Cusini, Francesca Pregnolato, Maria Orietta Borghi, Ursula Anderer, Karsten Conrad, Dirk Reinhold, Dirk Roggenbuck, Elena Csernok |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) employing ethanol-fixed neutrophils (ethN) is still the method of choice for assessing antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) in ANCA-associated vasculitides (AAV). However, conventional fluorescence microscopy is subjective and prone to high variability. The objective of this study was to evaluate novel pattern recognition algorithms for the standardized automated interpretation of ANCA patterns. METHODS: Seventy ANCA-positive samples (20 antimyeloperoxidase ANCA, 50 antiproteinase3 ANCA) and 100 controls from healthy individuals analyzed on ethN and formalin-fixed neutrophils (formN) by IIF were used as a 'training set' for the development of pattern recognition algorithms. Sera from 342 patients ('test set') with AAV and other systemic rheumatic and infectious diseases were tested for ANCA patterns using the novel pattern recognition algorithms and conventional fluorescence microscopy. RESULTS: Interpretation software employing pattern recognition algorithms was developed enabling positive/negative discrimination and classification of cytoplasmic ANCA (C-ANCA) and perinuclear ANCA (P-ANCA). Comparison of visual reading of the 'test set' samples with automated interpretation revealed Cohen's kappa (κ) values of 0.955 on ethN and 0.929 on formN for positive/negative discrimination. Analysis of the 'test set' with regard to the discrimination between C-ANCA and P-ANCA patterns showed a high agreement for ethN (κ = 0.746) and formN (κ = 0.847). There was no significant difference between visual and automated interpretation regarding positive/negative discrimination on ethN and formN, as well as ANCA pattern recognition (P > 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pattern recognition algorithms can assist in the automated interpretation of ANCA IIF. Automated reading of ethN and formN IIF patterns demonstrated high consistency with visual ANCA assessment. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 22% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 37% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 February 2014.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#2,443
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,093
of 286,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#27
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 286,420 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.