↓ Skip to main content

Impact of image quality on reliability of the measurements of left ventricular systolic function and global longitudinal strain in 2D echocardiography

Overview of attention for article published in Echo Research & Practice, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Impact of image quality on reliability of the measurements of left ventricular systolic function and global longitudinal strain in 2D echocardiography
Published in
Echo Research & Practice, March 2018
DOI 10.1530/erp-17-0047
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasufumi Nagata, Kado Yuichiro, Onoue Takeshi, Otani Kyoko, Nakazono Akemi, Otsuji Yutaka, Takeuchi Masaaki

Abstract

Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) play important roles in diagnosis and management of cardiac diseases. However, the issue of the accuracy and reliability of LVEF and GLS remains to be solved. Image quality is one of the most important factors affecting measurement variability. The aim of this study was to investigate whether improved image quality could reduce observer variability. Two sets of three apical images were acquired using relatively old- and new-generation ultrasound imaging systems (Vivid 7 and Vivid E95) in 308 subjects. Image quality was assessed by endocardial border delineation index (EBDI) using a 3-point scoring system. Three observers measured the LVEF and GLS, and these values and inter-observer variability were investigated. Image quality was significantly better with Vivid E95 (EBDI: 26.8±5.9) than that with Vivid 7 (22.8±6.3, p<0.0001). Regarding the inter-observer variability of LVEF, the r-value, bias, 95% limit of agreement, and intra-class correlation coefficient for Vivid 7 were comparable to those for Vivid E95. The %variabilities were significantly lower for Vivid E95 (5.3-6.5%) than those for Vivid 7 (6.5-7.5%). Regarding GLS, all observer variability parameters were better for Vivid E95 than for Vivid 7. Improvements in image quality yielded benefits to both LVEF and GLS measurement reliability. Multivariate analysis showed that image quality was indeed an important factor of observer variability in the measurement of LVEF and GLS. The new-generation ultrasound imaging system offers improved image quality and reduces inter-observer variability in the measurement of LVEF and GLS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 17 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 23%
Engineering 5 9%
Computer Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 24 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 June 2023.
All research outputs
#7,151,813
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Echo Research & Practice
#162
of 268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,542
of 344,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Echo Research & Practice
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 344,853 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.