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 |
A comparative study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and 99mTc-MDP whole-body bone scanning for imaging osteolytic bone metastases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Imaging, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12880-015-0047-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lin Zhang, Lihua Chen, Qiao Xie, Yongke Zhang, Lin Cheng, Haitao Li, Jian Wang |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic value of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and (99m)Tc-methylenediphosphonate (MDP) whole-body bone scanning (BS) for the detection of osteolytic bone metastases. Thirty-four patients with pathologically confirmed malignancies and suspected osteolytic bone metastases underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (99m)Tc-MDP whole-body BS within 30 days. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy with respect to the diagnosis of osteolytic bone metastases and bone lesions were compared between the two imaging methods. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for the diagnosis of osteolytic bone metastases were 94.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.6-96.2%), 83.3% (95% CI, 43.6-96.9%), and 94.2% (95% CI, 91.5-96.1%), respectively. It was found that (99m)Tc-MDP whole-body BS could discriminate between patients with 50.2% (95% CI, 45.4-55.1%) sensitivity, 50.0% (95% CI, 18.8-81.2%) specificity, and 50.2% (95% CI, 45.5-55.1%) accuracy. (18)F-FDG PET/CT achieved higher sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in detecting osteolytic bone metastases than 99mTc-MDP whole-body BS (p<0.001). F-FDG PET/CT has a higher diagnostic value than (99m)Tc-MDP whole-body BS in the detection of osteolytic bone metastases, especially in the vertebra. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 39% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 September 2015.
All research outputs
#13,195,932
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#143
of 596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,873
of 256,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 256,543 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.