↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of medial coronoid disease in 180 canine lame elbow joints: a sensitivity and specificity comparison of radiographic, computed tomographic and arthroscopic findings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Assessment of medial coronoid disease in 180 canine lame elbow joints: a sensitivity and specificity comparison of radiographic, computed tomographic and arthroscopic findings
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0556-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Villamonte-Chevalier, H. van Bree, BJG Broeckx, W. Dingemanse, M. Soler, B. Van Ryssen, I. Gielen

Abstract

Diagnostic imaging is essential to assess the lame patient; lesions of the elbow joint have traditionally been evaluated radiographically, however computed tomography (CT) has been suggested as a useful technique to diagnose various elbow pathologies. The primary objective of this study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of CT to assess medial coronoid disease (MCD), using arthroscopy as gold standard. The secondary objective was to ascertain the radiographic sensitivity and specificity for MCD compared with CT. For this study 180 elbow joints were assessed, of which 141 had been examined with radiography, CT and arthroscopy; and 39 joints, had radiographic and CT assessment. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for CT and radiographic findings using available statistical software. Sensitivity and specificity of CT using arthroscopy as gold standard resulted in high values for sensitivity (100 %) and specificity (93 %) for the assessment of MCD. For the radiographic evaluation, a sensitivity of 98 % and specificity of 64 - 69 % using CT as the technique of reference, were found. These results suggest that in case of doubt during radiographic assessment, CT could be used as a non-invasive technique to assess the presence of MCD. Based on the high sensitivity and specificity obtained in this study it has been considered that CT, rather than arthroscopy, is the preferred noninvasive technique to assess MCD lesions of the canine elbow joint.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 114 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 31 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 64 56%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 33 29%
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 08 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,774,664
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,679
of 3,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,197
of 274,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#30
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 274,962 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.