The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Evaluation of PET/MRI for Tumor Volume Delineation for Head and Neck Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2017.00008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kyle Wang, Brandon T. Mullins, Aaron D. Falchook, Jun Lian, Kelei He, Dinggang Shen, Michael Dance, Weili Lin, Tiffany M. Sills, Shiva K. Das, Benjamin Y. Huang, Bhishamjit S. Chera |
| Abstract |
Computed tomography (CT), combined positron emitted tomography and CT (PET/CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are commonly used in head and neck radiation planning. Hybrid PET/MRI has garnered attention for potential added value in cancer staging and treatment planning. Herein, we compare PET/MRI vs. planning CT for head and neck cancer gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation. We prospectively enrolled patients with head and neck cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation to 60-70 Gy using IMRT. We performed pretreatment contrast-enhanced planning CT and gadolinium-enhanced PET/MRI. Primary and nodal volumes were delineated on planning CT (GTV-CT) prospectively before treatment and PET/MRI (GTV-PET/MRI) retrospectively after treatment. GTV-PET/MRI was compared to GTV-CT using separate rigid registrations for each tumor volume. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) metric evaluating spatial overlap and modified Hausdorff distance (mHD) evaluating mean orthogonal distance difference were calculated. Minimum dose to 95% of GTVs (D95) was compared. Eleven patients were evaluable (10 oropharynx, 1 larynx). Nine patients had evaluable primary tumor GTVs and seven patients had evaluable nodal GTVs. Mean primary GTV-CT and GTV-PET/MRI size were 13.2 and 14.3 cc, with mean intersection 8.7 cc, DSC 0.63, and mHD 1.6 mm. D95 was 65.3 Gy for primary GTV-CT vs. 65.2 Gy for primary GTV-PET/MRI. Mean nodal GTV-CT and GTV-PET/MRI size were 19.0 and 23.0 cc, with mean intersection 14.4 cc, DSC 0.69, and mHD 2.3 mm. D95 was 62.3 Gy for both nodal GTV-CT and GTV-PET/MRI. In this series of patients with head and neck (primarily oropharynx) cancer, PET/MRI and CT-GTVs had similar volumes (though there were individual cases with larger differences) with overall small discrepancies in spatial overlap, small mean orthogonal distance differences, and similar radiation doses. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 23% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 32% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 32% |
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 27 January 2017.
All research outputs
#14,539,224
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#3,725
of 22,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,520
of 422,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#9
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,420 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 422,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.