| Title |
Stomach frame-count-based attenuation correction of dynamic posterior view gastric emptying scintigraphy with continuous acquisition in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Radiology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00247-017-3917-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xinhua Cao, Xiaoyin Xu, Laura Drubach, Frederic H. Fahey |
| Abstract |
When performing dynamic gastric emptying scintigraphy with continuous acquisition in children, a single posterior view acquisition is preferred because it allows the young patient to more easily interact with a parent or technologist even though this method tends toward overestimating gastric emptying. The objective of our study was to develop a new attenuation correction (AC) method to improve the accuracy of the time activity curve and the measurement of residual gastric emptying from 1-h posterior images of gastric emptying scintigraphy with continuous acquisition. We developed a frame-count-based AC for gastric emptying scintigraphy from the posterior view (posterior AC method). We retrospectively reviewed 122 gastric emptying studies performed in children using conjugated posterior and anterior views, and evaluated the statistical differences between posterior only (without AC) and posterior AC using the geometric mean method as a reference standard. The residual values obtained using posterior AC were not significantly different (P=0.813) compared to those using the geometric mean while the values using the posterior only were significantly different (P<0.001) from the geometric mean. The proposed method can replace the geometric mean method to estimate gastric emptying residual fraction using patient-friendly posterior view without a significant difference in 1-h gastric emptying scintigraphy with continuous acquisition. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 25% |
| Other | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 13% |
| Researcher | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 63% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
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 26 October 2017.
All research outputs
#20,450,513
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Radiology
#1,765
of 2,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,382
of 313,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Radiology
#44
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,094 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 313,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.