↓ Skip to main content

A semiautomatic method to identify vertebral end plate lesions (Schmorl's nodes)

Overview of attention for article published in Spine Journal, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
A semiautomatic method to identify vertebral end plate lesions (Schmorl's nodes)
Published in
Spine Journal, April 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.04.027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Newell, Caroline A. Grant, Maree T. Izatt, J. Paige Little, Mark J. Pearcy, Clayton J. Adam

Abstract

There are differences in definitions of end plate lesions (EPLs), often referred to as Schmorl's nodes, that may, to some extent, account for the large range of reported prevalence (3.8 - 76%). To develop a technique to measure the size, prevalence and location of EPLs in a consistent manner. This study proposed a method using a detection algorithm which was applied to five adolescent females (average age 15.1 years, range 13.0 to 19.2 years) with idiopathic scoliosis (average major Cobb angle 60°, range 55 to 67°). Existing low-dose, computed tomography (CT) scans were segmented semi-automatically to extract 3D morphology of each vertebral endplate. Any remaining attachments to the posterior elements of adjacent vertebrae or endplates were then manually sectioned. An automatic algorithm was used to determine the presence and position of EPLs. EPLs were identified in 15 of the 170 (8.8%) endplates analysed with an average depth of 3.1mm. 11/15 of the EPLs were seen in the lumbar spine. The algorithm was found to be most sensitive to changes in the minimum EPL gradient at the edges of the EPL. This study describes an imaging analysis technique for consistent measurement of the prevalence, location and size of EPLs. The technique can be used to analyse large populations without observer errors in EPL definitions.

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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 16%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 32%
Engineering 8 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 27%
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 28 April 2015.
All research outputs
#8,262,107
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Spine Journal
#991
of 3,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,200
of 279,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spine Journal
#22
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,852 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 73% 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 279,912 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.