↓ Skip to main content

Clinical evaluation of a computer-aided diagnosis system for determining cancer aggressiveness in prostate MRI

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Clinical evaluation of a computer-aided diagnosis system for determining cancer aggressiveness in prostate MRI
Published in
European Radiology, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00330-015-3743-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geert J. S. Litjens, Jelle O. Barentsz, Nico Karssemeijer, Henkjan J. Huisman

Abstract

To investigate the added value of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) on the diagnostic accuracy of PIRADS reporting and the assessment of cancer aggressiveness. Multi-parametric MRI and histopathological outcome of MR-guided biopsies of a consecutive set of 130 patients were included. All cases were prospectively PIRADS reported and the reported lesions underwent CAD analysis. Logistic regression combined the CAD prediction and radiologist PIRADS score into a combination score. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Spearman's correlation coefficient were used to assess the diagnostic accuracy and correlation to cancer grade. Evaluation was performed for discriminating benign lesions from cancer and for discriminating indolent from aggressive lesions. In total 141 lesions (107 patients) were included for final analysis. The area-under-the-ROC-curve of the combination score was higher than for the PIRADS score of the radiologist (benign vs. cancer, 0.88 vs. 0.81, p = 0.013 and indolent vs. aggressive, 0.88 vs. 0.78, p < 0.01). The combination score correlated significantly stronger with cancer grade (0.69, p = 0.0014) than the individual CAD system or radiologist (0.54 and 0.58). Combining CAD prediction and PIRADS into a combination score has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, such a combination score has a strong correlation with cancer grade. • Computer-aided diagnosis helps radiologists discriminate benign findings from cancer in prostate MRI. • Combining PIRADS and computer-aided diagnosis improves differentiation between indolent and aggressive cancer. • Adding computer-aided diagnosis to PIRADS increases the correlation coefficient with respect to cancer grade.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 33 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 31%
Engineering 9 8%
Computer Science 8 7%
Physics and Astronomy 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 42 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#13,949,913
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#2,071
of 4,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,317
of 266,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#36
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,118 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 266,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.