↓ Skip to main content

The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of bone tumours and tumour-like lesions

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
Title
The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of bone tumours and tumour-like lesions
Published in
Insights into Imaging, July 2014
DOI 10.1007/s13244-014-0339-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duarte Nascimento, Guilherme Suchard, Maruan Hatem, Armando de Abreu

Abstract

Bone tumours and tumour-like lesions are frequently encountered by radiologists. Although radiographs are the primary screening technique, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can help narrow the differential or make a specific diagnosis when a lesion is indeterminate or shows signs of aggressiveness. MRI can extend the diagnostic evaluation by demonstrating several tissue components. Even when a specific diagnosis cannot be made, the differential diagnosis can be narrowed. MRI is superior to the other imaging modalities in detecting bone marrow lesions and tumoral tissue (faint lytic/sclerotic bone lesions can be difficult to visualise using only radiographs). Contrast-enhanced MRI can reveal the most vascularised parts of the tumour and MRI guidance makes it possible to avoid biopsing necrotic areas. MRI is very helpful in local staging and surgical planning by assessing the degree of intramedullary extension and invasion of the adjacent physeal plates, joints, muscle compartments and neurovascular bundles. It can be used in assessing response to neoadjuvant therapy and further restaging. The post-therapeutic follow-up should also be done using MRI. Despite the high quality of MRI, there are a few pitfalls and limitations of which one should be aware. Applications of MRI in bone tumours will probably continue to grow as new sequences are further studied.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ukraine 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 19 14%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Postgraduate 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Master 10 8%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 31 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Engineering 4 3%
Computer Science 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 39 30%
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 08 September 2014.
All research outputs
#7,412,839
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#431
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,207
of 230,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 230,362 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.