↓ Skip to main content

Potential of quantitative susceptibility mapping for detection of prostatic calcifications

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
54 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.
Article details
Title
Potential of quantitative susceptibility mapping for detection of prostatic calcifications
Published in
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, July 2016
DOI 10.1002/jmri.25385
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To evaluate whether quantitative susceptibility (QSM) may be used as an alternative to computed tomography (CT) to detect calcification in prostate cancer patients. Susceptibility map calculation was performed using 3D gradient echo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data from 26 patients measured at 3T who previously received a planning CT of the prostate. Phase images were unwrapped using Laplacian-based phase unwrapping, the background field was removed with the V-SHARP method, and susceptibility maps were calculated with the iLSQR method. Two blinded readers were asked to identify peri- and intraprostatic calcifications. Average mean and minimum susceptibility values (referenced to iliopsoas muscle) of calcifications were -0.249 ± 0.179 ppm and -0.551 ± 0.323 ppm, and average mean and maximum intensities in CT images were 319 ± 164 HU and 679 ± 392 HU. Twenty-one and 17 out of 22 prostatic calcifications were identified using susceptibility maps and magnitude images, respectively, as well as more than half of periprostatic phleboliths depicted by CT. Calcifications in the prostate and its periphery were quantitatively differentiable from noncalcified prostate tissue in CT (mean values for calcifications / for noncalcified tissue: 71 to 649 / -1 to 83 HU) and in QSM (mean values for calcifications / for noncalcified tissue: -0.641 to 0.063 / -0.046 to 0.181 ppm). Moreover, there was a significant correlation between susceptibility values and CT image intensities for calcifications (P < 0.004). Prostatic calcifications could be well identified with QSM. Susceptibility maps can be easily obtained from clinical prostate MR protocols that include a 3D gradient echo sequence, rendering it a promising technique for detection and quantification of intraprostatic calcifications. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 22%
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Other 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 28%
Engineering 8 15%
Physics and Astronomy 7 13%
Computer Science 3 6%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 15 28%
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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,588,331
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
#2,151
of 3,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,272
of 363,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
#21
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,781 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 363,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.