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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Imaging Appearances and Pathologic Characteristics of Spinal Epidural Meningioma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Neuroradiology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3174/ajnr.a5414 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
L.H. Zhang, H.S. Yuan |
| Abstract |
Spinal epidural meningioma is an uncommon tumor. This study aimed to analyze the imaging and pathologic characteristics of this rare tumor. Fourteen confirmed cases of epidural meningioma were retrospectively reviewed, and imaging characteristics and pathologic findings were analyzed to identify the typical features. The mean age of the patients (4 men, 10 women) was 44.9 years. Twelve tumors were in the cervical spinal canal, and 2, in the thoracic spinal canal. There were 9 en plaque meningiomas, 4 dumbbell-shaped meningiomas, and 1 fusiform/ovoid meningioma. The epidural meningiomas extended over 2-5 spinal segments (mean, 3.2 spinal segments). A soft epidural mass was seen in 12/14 (86%) patients. Dural calcification was seen in 8/14 (57%) tumors. Tumor caused intervertebral foramen enlargement in 10/14 (71%) patients and adhered to the nerve roots in 11/14 (79%) patients. Intradural invasion was seen in 8/14 (57%) patients. The dural tail sign was present in 13/14 (93%) tumors on contrast-enhanced T1WI. Regarding pathologic type, 10 of 14 (71%) were psammomatous, 2 of 14 (14%) were meningothelial, 1 of 14 (7%) was angiomatous, and 1 of 14 (7%) was transitional. During follow-up (mean follow-up, 73.4 months; range, 4-192 months), 7 patients had recurrence. Recurrences were between 4 and 192 months after the operation. Epidural meningioma has 3 different growth patterns. Dural thickening, calcification, invasion, and epidural mass formation are characteristic features of epidural meningioma. Regular follow-up imaging is required to detect recurrence. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Turkey | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 45% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 May 2019.
All research outputs
#13,063,214
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#2,665
of 4,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,801
of 327,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#64
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,909 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 327,192 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.