| Title |
Accuracy and Reliability of Infrared Thermography in Assessment of the Breasts of Women Affected by Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-017-0730-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rinaldo Roberto de Jesus Guirro, Maíta Marade Oliveira Lima Leite Vaz, Lais Mara Siqueira das Neves, Almir Vieira Dibai-Filho, Hélio Humberto Angotti Carrara, Elaine Caldeira de Oliveira Guirro |
| Abstract |
Evaluate reliability and accuracy of infrared thermography in the assessment of women wth breasts cancer. Thirty-five participants had unilateral breast cancer and 17 control subjects were assessed using infrared thermography. To evaluate reliability, two professionals, who were experienced, measured the temperature of the infrared images in two different moments, with a one-week interval. Biopsy was used as a gold standard exam with regard identify breast cancer. The analysis illustrated excellent reliability in terms of the affected, contralateral and control breasts with the intra-class correlation coefficient values ranging from 0.948 to 0.999. Standard measurement error ranged from 0.04 to 0.28 °C, and minimum detectable change deviated from 0.11 to 0.78 °C. Moreover, low to moderate accuracy were observed in terms of the establishment of the breast cancer diagnosis with values of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve ranging from 0.571 and 0.749. Breasts affected by cancer present higher skin temperature compared to contralateral and control. Furthermore, excellent reliability of the analysis of the infrared images and low-moderate accuracy in terms diagnosis were observed. Considering the results, infrared thermography can be applied as an instrument complement the assessment of breast cancer patients, but not for diagnostic purposes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 24% |
| Unknown | 25 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 14% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 35% |
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 29 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,453,139
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#667
of 1,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,575
of 310,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,157 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 310,001 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 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.