↓ Skip to main content

Appendiceal diameter as a predictor of appendicitis in children: improved diagnosis with three diagnostic categories derived from a logistic predictive model

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Appendiceal diameter as a predictor of appendicitis in children: improved diagnosis with three diagnostic categories derived from a logistic predictive model
Published in
European Radiology, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00330-015-3639-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew T. Trout, Alexander J. Towbin, Shelby R. Fierke, Bin Zhang, David B. Larson

Abstract

To develop and assess the performance of a diameter-based logistic predictive model and a derived 3-category interpretive scheme for the sonographic diagnosis of paediatric appendicitis. Appendiceal diameters were extracted from reports of ultrasound examinations in children and young adults. Data were used to generate a logistic predictive model which was used to define negative, equivocal and positive interpretive categories. Diagnostic performance of the derived 3-category interpretive scheme was compared with simulated binary interpretive schemes. Six hundred forty-one appendix ultrasound reports were reviewed with appendicitis present in 181 (28.2 %). Cut-off diameters based on the logistic predictive model were ≤6 mm = normal, >6 mm-8 mm = equivocal and >8 mm = positive with appendicitis present in 2.6 % (11/428), 64.9 % (72/111) and 96.1 % (98/102) of cases in each group. These cut-offs conferred 97.2 % accuracy with 17.3 % (111/641) of cases considered equivocal. Of the binary cut-offs, a 6 mm cut-off performed best with 91.6 % accuracy. AIC analysis favoured the logistic model over the binary model for prediction of appendicitis. A 3-category interpretive scheme based on a logistic predictive model provides higher accuracy in the diagnosis of appendicitis than traditional binary diameter cut-offs. Inclusion of an equivocal interpretive category more accurately reflects the probability distribution of prediction of appendicitis by ultrasound. • Three diameter categories outperform a 6-mm cut-off to diagnose appendicitis • Three categories allow more confident exclusion of appendicitis • Three categories allow more confident diagnosis of appendicitis • Three categories more accurately reflect the probability of appendicitis by ultrasound.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,693,848
of 23,414,653 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#256
of 4,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,451
of 265,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#8
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,414,653 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,238 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 265,800 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.