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 |
Screening for distant metastases in head and neck cancer patients using FDG-PET and chest CT: validation of an algorithm
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-015-3773-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Asaf Senft, Otto S. Hoekstra, Birgit I. Witte, C. René Leemans, Remco de Bree |
| Abstract |
In patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and high-risk factors, the combination of whole body FDG-PET and contrast-enhanced chest CT has the highest sensitivity and accuracy when screening for distant metastases. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively validate an earlier developed algorithm for interpreting the combination of screening PET and CT. The test cohort consisted of 47 consecutive HNSCC patients with high-risk factors for distant metastases, who had previously undergone FDG-PET and CT and had a minimum 12 months of follow-up. In 12 (26 %) patients, distant metastases were detected during screening or within 12-month follow-up. In patients with locoregional control during follow-up, the sensitivity and specificity were 55 % (95 % CI 23-83 %) and 97 % (95 % CI 82-99 %), respectively, for chest CT, 55 % (95 % CI 23-83 %) and 100 % (95 % CI 88-100 %), respectively, for PET and 73 % (95 % CI 39-94 %) and 100 % (95 % CI 88-100 %), respectively, for the combination of PET and CT. The proposed algorithm was considered to have been validated. In this algorithm, all FDG-PET positive scans for distant metastases (regardless of interpretation of a solid lung lesion on CT) and CT scans with suspicious pulmonary lesions of less than 5-mm diameter (regardless of FDG-PET findings) are considered positive for distant metastases. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 61% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 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 10 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,291,881
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2,026
of 3,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,499
of 267,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#12
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 3,071 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 267,220 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 31 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.