↓ Skip to main content

Breast fat volume measurement using wide-bore 3 T MRI: comparison of traditional mammographic density evaluation with MRI density measurements using automatic segmentation

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Radiology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Breast fat volume measurement using wide-bore 3 T MRI: comparison of traditional mammographic density evaluation with MRI density measurements using automatic segmentation
Published in
Clinical Radiology, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.crad.2017.02.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Petridou, M. Kibiro, C. Gladwell, P. Malcolm, A. Toms, A. Juette, M. Borga, O. Dahlqvist Leinhard, T. Romu, B. Kasmai, E. Denton

Abstract

To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived breast density measurements using automatic segmentation algorithms with radiologist estimations using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (BI-RADS) density classification. Forty women undergoing mammography and dynamic breast MRI as part of their clinical management were recruited. Fat-water separated MRI images derived from a two-point Dixon technique, phase-sensitive reconstruction, and atlas-based segmentation were obtained before and after intravenous contrast medium administration. Breast density was assessed using software from Advanced MR Analytics (AMRA), Linköping, Sweden, with results compared to the widely used four-quartile quantitative BI-RADS scale. The proportion of glandular tissue in the breast on MRI was derived from the AMRA sequence. The mean unenhanced breast density was 0.31±0.22 (mean±SD; left) and 0.29±0.21 (right). Mean breast density on post-contrast images was 0.32±0.19 (left) and 0.32±0.2 (right). There was "almost perfect" correlation between pre- and post-contrast breast density quantification: Spearman's correlation rho=0.98 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.97-0.99; left) and rho=0.99 (95% CI: 0.98-0.99; right). The 95% limits of agreement were -0.11-0.08 (left) and -0.08-0.03 (right). Interobserver reliability for BI-RADS was "substantial": weighted Kappa k=0.8 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87). The Spearman correlation coefficient between BI-RADS and MRI breast density was rho=0.73 (95% CI: 0.60-0.82; left) and rho=0.75 (95% CI: 0.63-0.83; right) which was also "substantial". The AMRA sequence provides a fully automated, reproducible, objective assessment of fibroglandular breast tissue proportion that correlates well with mammographic assessment of breast density with the added advantage of avoidance of ionising radiation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Researcher 5 19%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 11 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 April 2021.
All research outputs
#7,962,193
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Radiology
#499
of 2,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,265
of 322,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Radiology
#11
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,163 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 322,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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.