↓ Skip to main content

Factors contributing to the variability of a predictive score for cranial cruciate ligament deficiency in Labrador Retrievers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Factors contributing to the variability of a predictive score for cranial cruciate ligament deficiency in Labrador Retrievers
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-1154-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Devin P. Cunningham, Ayman A. Mostafa, Wanda J. Gordan-Evans, Randy J. Boudrieau, Dominique J. Griffon

Abstract

We recently reported that a conformation score derived from the tibial plateau angle (TPA) and the femoral anteversion angle (FAA), best discriminates limbs predisposed to, or affected by cranial cruciate ligament disease (CCLD), from those that are at low risk for CCLD. The specificity and sensitivity of this score were high enough to support further investigations toward its use for large-scale screening of dogs by veterinarians. The next step, which is the objective of the current study, is to determine inter-observer variability of that CCLD score in a large population of Labrador Retrievers. A total of 167 Labradors were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Limbs of normal dogs over 6 years of age with no history of CCLD were considered at low risk for CCLD. Limbs of dogs with CCLD were considered at high risk for CCLD. Tibial plateau and femoral anteversion angles were measured independently by two investigators to calculate a CCLD score for each limb. Kappa statistics were used to determine the extent of agreement between investigators. Pearson's correlation and intraclass coefficients were calculated to evaluate the correlation between investigators and the relative contribution of each measurement to the variability of the CCLD score. The correlation between CCLD scores calculated by investigators was good (correlation coefficient = 0.68 p < 0.0001). However, interobserver agreement with regards to the predicted status of limbs was fair (kappa value = 0.28), with 37% of limbs being assigned divergent classifications. Variations in CCLD scores correlated best with those of TPA, which was the least consistent parameter between investigators. Absolute interobserver differences were two times greater for FAAs (4.19° ± 3.15) than TPAs (2.23° ± 1.91). The reproducibility of the CCLD score between investigators is fair, justifying caution when interpreting individual scores. Future studies should focus on improving the reproducibility of TPA and FAA measurements, as strategies to improve the agreement between CCLD scores.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 26%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,954,297
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,248
of 3,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,190
of 317,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#37
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 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 3,065 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 317,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.