↓ Skip to main content

Segmentation of the human spinal cord

Overview of attention for article published in Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 492)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Segmentation of the human spinal cord
Published in
Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10334-015-0507-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin De Leener, Manuel Taso, Julien Cohen-Adad, Virginie Callot

Abstract

Segmenting the spinal cord contour is a necessary step for quantifying spinal cord atrophy in various diseases. Delineating gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) is also useful for quantifying GM atrophy or for extracting multiparametric MRI metrics into specific WM tracts. Spinal cord segmentation in clinical research is not as developed as brain segmentation, however with the substantial improvement of MR sequences adapted to spinal cord MR investigations, the field of spinal cord MR segmentation has advanced greatly within the last decade. Segmentation techniques with variable accuracy and degree of complexity have been developed and reported in the literature. In this paper, we review some of the existing methods for cord and WM/GM segmentation, including intensity-based, surface-based, and image-based methods. We also provide recommendations for validating spinal cord segmentation techniques, as it is important to understand the intrinsic characteristics of the methods and to evaluate their performance and limitations. Lastly, we illustrate some applications in the healthy and pathological spinal cord. One conclusion of this review is that robust and automatic segmentation is clinically relevant, as it would allow for longitudinal and group studies free from user bias as well as reproducible multicentric studies in large populations, thereby helping to further our understanding of the spinal cord pathophysiology and to develop new criteria for early detection of subclinical evolution for prognosis prediction and for patient management. Another conclusion is that at the present time, no single method adequately segments the cord and its substructure in all the cases encountered (abnormal intensities, loss of contrast, deformation of the cord, etc.). A combination of different approaches is thus advised for future developments, along with the introduction of probabilistic shape models. Maturation of standardized frameworks, multiplatform availability, inclusion in large suite and data sharing would also ultimately benefit to the community.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 120 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Researcher 18 15%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 31 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 19%
Engineering 18 15%
Neuroscience 17 14%
Computer Science 9 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 41 33%
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 10 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,944,943
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine
#4
of 492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,638
of 397,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 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 492 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 397,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.