↓ Skip to main content

The qualitative grading of muscle fat infiltration in whiplash using fat and water magnetic resonance imaging

Overview of attention for article published in Spine Journal, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
The qualitative grading of muscle fat infiltration in whiplash using fat and water magnetic resonance imaging
Published in
Spine Journal, September 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.08.233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Abbott, Anneli Peolsson, Janne West, James M. Elliott, Ulrika Åslund, Anette Karlsson, Olof Dahlqvist Leinhard

Abstract

Development of muscle fat infiltration (MFI) in the neck muscles is associated with poor functional recovery following whiplash injury. Custom software and time-consuming manual segmentation of magnetic resonance (MR) images is required for quantitative analysis and presents as a barrier for clinical translation. The purpose of this work was to establish a qualitative MR measure for MFI and evaluate its ability to differentiate between individuals with severe whiplash-associated disorder (WAD), mild/moderate WAD, and healthy controls. Cross-Sectional PATIENT SAMPLE: Thirty-one subjects with WAD and 31 age and sex matched controls were recruited from an ongoing randomized controlled trial. The cervical multifidus was visually identified and segmented into eighths in the axial fat/water images (C4-C7). MFI was assessed on a visual scale: 0 for no or marginal MFI, 1 for light MFI and 2 for distinct MFI. The participants with WAD were divided in two groups: mild/moderate and severe based on neck disability index (NDI) % scores. The mean regional MFI was compared between the healthy controls and each of the WAD groups using the Mann-Whitney U-test. ROC-analyses were carried out to evaluate the validity of the qualitative method. The study received funding from the Swedish Research Council and the Medical research council of South-East Sweden (FORSS). AP and UÅ have no conflicts of interests to report. ODL, JW and AK are stockowners in Advanced MR Analytics AB (AMRA). JE reports relevant activities outside the body of work as 35% investment/ownership in a medical consulting start-up, Pain ID, LLC. Twenty-one (68%) patients had mild/moderate disability and 10 (32%) were considered severe. Inter- and intra- rater reliability was excellent when grading was averaged by level or when frequency of grade 2 was considered. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) in regional MFI were particularly notable between the severe WAD group and healthy controls. The ROC-curve, based on detection of distinct MFI, showed an area-under-the curve of 0.768 (95% CI 0.59-0.94) for discrimination of WAD participants. These preliminary results suggest a qualitative MR measure for MFI is reliable and valid, and may prove useful towards the classification of WAD in radiology practice.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 25 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 31 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,745,807
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Spine Journal
#1,515
of 3,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,491
of 323,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spine Journal
#40
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 323,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.