↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the cingulate island sign with optimized ratios for discriminating dementia with Lewy bodies from Alzheimer’s disease using brain perfusion SPECT

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Nuclear Medicine, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 635)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Validation of the cingulate island sign with optimized ratios for discriminating dementia with Lewy bodies from Alzheimer’s disease using brain perfusion SPECT
Published in
Annals of Nuclear Medicine, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12149-017-1181-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Etsuko Imabayashi, Tsutomu Soma, Daichi Sone, Tadashi Tsukamoto, Yukio Kimura, Noriko Sato, Miho Murata, Hiroshi Matsuda

Abstract

Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is often cited as the second most common dementia after Alzheimer's disease (AD). It is clinically important to distinguish DLB from AD because specific side effects of antipsychotic drugs are limited to DLB. The relative preservation of cingulate glucose metabolism in the posterior cingulate gyri versus that in the precuni, known as the cingulate island sign (CIS), in patients with DLB compared with AD is supposed to be highly specific for diagnosing DLB. In a previous study, using brain perfusion SPECT, the largest value (0.873) for the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for differentiating DLB from AD was obtained with the ratio of the posterior cingulate gyri from an early Alzheimer's disease-specific hypoperfusion volume of interest (VOI) versus the medial occipital lobe. Two purposes of this study are as follows: one is optimization of VOI setting for calculating CIS values and the other is to evaluate their accuracy and simultaneously to retest the method described in our previous paper. We conducted a retest of this SPECT method with another cohort of 13 patients with DLB and 13 patients with AD. Furthermore, we optimized VOIs using contrast images obtained from group comparisons of DLB and normal controls; the same 18 patients with DLB and 18 normal controls examined in our previous study. We obtained DLB-specific VOIs from areas where brain perfusion was significantly decreased in DLB. As the numerators of these ratios, early Alzheimer's disease-specific VOIs were used after subtracting DLB-specific VOIs. The DLB-specific VOIs were used as the denominator. In retest, the obtained AUC was 0.858 and the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 84.6, 84.6, and 84.6%, respectively. The ROC curve analysis with these optimized VOIs yielded a higher AUC of 0.882; and the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of these new CIS ratios were 84.6, 92.3, and 76.9%, respectively, with a threshold value of 0.281. Optimized CISs using brain perfusion SPECT are clinically useful for differentiating DLB from AD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Neuroscience 8 16%
Psychology 4 8%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#4,214,277
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#42
of 635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,576
of 313,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 635 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 313,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.