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 |
Comparative Study of Voxel-Based Epileptic Foci Localization Accuracy between Statistical Parametric Mapping and Three-dimensional Stereotactic Surface Projection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2016.00164 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kailiang Wang, Tinghong Liu, Xiaobin Zhao, XiaoTong Xia, Kai Zhang, Hui Qiao, Jianguo Zhang, Fangang Meng |
| Abstract |
Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography ((18)F-FDG-PET) is widely used to help localize the hypometabolic epileptogenic focus for presurgical evaluation of drug-refractory epilepsy patients. Two voxel-based brain mapping methods to interpret (18)F-FDG-PET, statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and three-dimensional stereotactic surface projection (3D-SSP), improve the detection rate of seizure foci. This study aimed to compare the consistency of epileptic focus detection between SPM and 3D-SSP for (18)F-FDG-PET brain mapping analysis. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical, electroecephalographic, and brain imaging results of 35 patients with refractory epilepsy. (18)F-FDG-PET studies were revaluated by SPM, 3D-SSP, and visual assessment, and the results were compared to the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesion location and to the presumed epileptogenic zone (PEZ) defined by video-electroencephalogram and other clinical data. A second consistency study compared PET analyses to histopathology and surgical outcomes in the 19 patients who underwent lesion resection surgery. Of the 35 patients, consistency with the PEZ was 29/35 for SPM, 25/35 for 3D-SSP, 14/35 for visual assessment, and 10/35 for MRI. Concordance rates with the PEZ were significantly higher for SPM and 3D-SSP than for MRI (P < 0.05) and visual assessment (P < 0.05). Differences between SPM and 3D-SSP and between visual assessment and MRI were not significant. In the 19 surgical patients, concordance with histopathology/clinical outcome was 14/19 for SPM, 15/19 for 3D-SSP, 14/19 for visual assessment, and 9/19 for MRI (P > 0.05). A favorable Engel outcome (class I/II) was found in 16 of 19 cases (84%), and failure of seizure control was found in 3 of 19 patients (class III/IV). Voxel-based (18)F-FDG-PET brain mapping analysis using SPM or 3D-SSP can improve the detection rate of the epileptic focus compared to visual assessment and MRI. Consistency with PEZ was similar between SPM and 3D-SSP; according to their own characteristics, 3D-SSP is recommended for primary evaluation due to greater efficiency and operability of the software, while SPM is recommended for high-accuracy localization of complex lesions. Therefore, joint application of both software packages may be the best solution for FDG-PET analysis of epileptic focus localization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 21% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
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 04 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,734,082
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,028
of 11,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,838
of 322,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#38
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,814 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 322,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.