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 |
Accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT with optimal cut-offs of maximum standardized uptake value according to size for diagnosis of regional lymph node metastasis in patients with rectal cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Imaging, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40644-018-0165-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sung Uk Bae, Kyoung Sook Won, Bong-Il Song, Woon Kyung Jeong, Seong Kyu Baek, Hae Won Kim |
| Abstract |
The low sensitivity of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the evaluation of metastatic lymph nodes (LNs) is mainly due to the partial volume effect in patients with rectal cancer. This retrospective study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT with optimal cut-off values of the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), according to LN size, for the evaluation of regional LN in rectal cancer patients. This study included 176 patients with rectal cancer who underwent F-18 FDG PET/CT for initial staging. Patients were classified based on the long-axis diameter of the regional LN on CT images as small (≤ 7 mm; n = 118) and large (> 7 mm; n = 58) LN groups. The optimal cut-off value of SUVmax was determined for each group, using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Areas under the curve (AUC) were compared by C-statistics using two methods: the cut-off value of SUVmax optimized according to LN size, and a fixed SUVmax cut-off value of 2.5. The optimal cut-off values of SUVmax for the small and large LN groups were 1.1, and 2.1, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT using the optimal cut-off values were 90.6, 70.9, and 76.3% in the small LN group, and 68.6, 78.3, and 72.4% in the large LN group. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT using the fixed cut-off value were 18.8, 100, and 78.0% in the small LN group, and 51.4, 87.0, and 65.5% in the large LN group. The AUC was significantly higher using the optimal cut-off values than the fixed cut-off value (0.808 vs. 0.594, p = 0.005) in the small LN group, but not in the large LN group (0.734 vs. 0.692, p = 0.429). Application of the lower cut-off value of SUVmax improves the diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT for the evaluation of small regional LNs in patients with rectal cancer. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 30% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 44% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 26% |
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 19 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Imaging
#291
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,169
of 348,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Imaging
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 348,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 57% of its contemporaries.