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 |
Impact of [18F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00259-011-1899-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patsuree Cheebsumon, Maqsood Yaqub, Floris H. P. van Velden, Otto S. Hoekstra, Adriaan A. Lammertsma, Ronald Boellaard |
| Abstract |
Delineation of tumour boundaries is important for quantification of [(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) studies and for definition of biological target volumes in radiotherapy. Several (semi-)automatic tumour delineation methods have been proposed, but these methods differ substantially in estimating tumour volume and their performance may be affected by imaging parameters. The main purpose of this study was to explore the performance dependence of various (semi-)automatic tumour delineation methods on different imaging parameters, i.e. reconstruction parameters, noise levels and tumour characteristics, and thereby the need for standardization or inter-institute calibration. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 27% |
| Researcher | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 41% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 14 | 17% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
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 23 August 2011.
All research outputs
#21,153,429
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#2,610
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,888
of 125,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#19
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 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 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. 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 125,883 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 21 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.