↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility of a Synthetic MR Imaging Sequence for Spine Imaging

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Neuroradiology, August 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Feasibility of a Synthetic MR Imaging Sequence for Spine Imaging
Published in
American Journal of Neuroradiology, August 2018
DOI 10.3174/ajnr.a5728
Pubmed ID
Authors

M.I. Vargas, M. Drake-Pérez, B.M.A Delattre, J. Boto, K.-O. Lovblad, S. Boudabous

Abstract

Synthetic MR imaging is a method that can produce multiple contrasts from a single sequence, as well as quantitative maps. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of a synthetic MR image for spine imaging. Thirty-eight patients with clinical indications of infectious, degenerative, and neoplastic disease underwent an MR imaging of the spine (11 cervical, 8 dorsal, and 19 lumbosacral MR imaging studies). The SyntAc sequence, with an acquisition time of 5 minutes 40 seconds, was added to the usual imaging protocol consisting of conventional sagittal T1 TSE, T2 TSE, and STIR TSE. Synthetic T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and STIR images were of adequate quality, and the acquisition time was 53% less than with conventional MR imaging. The image quality was rated as "good" for both synthetic and conventional images. Interreader agreement concerning lesion conspicuity was good with a Cohen κ of 0.737. Artifacts consisting of white pixels/spike noise across contrast views, as well as flow artifacts, were more common in the synthetic sequences, particularly in synthetic STIR. There were no statistically significant differences between readers concerning the scores assigned for image quality or lesion conspicuity. Our study shows that synthetic MR imaging is feasible in spine imaging and produces, in general, good image quality and diagnostic confidence. Furthermore, the non-negligible time savings and the ability to obtain quantitative measurements as well as to generate several contrasts with a single acquisition should promise a bright future for synthetic MR imaging in clinical routine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 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 %
Researcher 4 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 18%
Other 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 27%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Engineering 2 9%
Chemistry 1 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 27 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,163,604
of 25,192,722 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#364
of 5,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,940
of 337,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#3
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,192,722 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. 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 337,066 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.