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 |
PET/CT imaging in lung cancer: indications and findings*
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Jornal de Pneumologia, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s1806-37132015000004479 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bruno Hochhegger, Giordano Rafael Tronco Alves, Klaus Loureiro Irion, Carlos Cezar Fritscher, Leandro Genehr Fritscher, Natália Henz Concatto, Edson Marchiori |
| Abstract |
The use of PET/CT imaging in the work-up and management of patients with lung cancer has greatly increased in recent decades. The ability to combine functional and anatomical information has equipped PET/CT to look into various aspects of lung cancer, allowing more precise disease staging and providing useful data during the characterization of indeterminate pulmonary nodules. In addition, the accuracy of PET/CT has been shown to be greater than is that of conventional modalities in some scenarios, making PET/CT a valuable noninvasive method for the investigation of lung cancer. However, the interpretation of PET/CT findings presents numerous pitfalls and potential confounders. Therefore, it is imperative for pulmonologists and radiologists to familiarize themselves with the most relevant indications for and limitations of PET/CT, seeking to protect their patients from unnecessary radiation exposure and inappropriate treatment. This review article aimed to summarize the basic principles, indications, cancer staging considerations, and future applications related to the use of PET/CT in lung cancer. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 7% |
| Researcher | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 15% |
| Unknown | 42 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Engineering | 6 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 49 | 40% |
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 15 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,154,879
of 25,628,260 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pneumologia
#268
of 718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,511
of 360,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pneumologia
#18
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,628,260 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 718 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 360,954 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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 64% of its contemporaries.