↓ Skip to main content

Hyperspectral Imaging and K-Means Classification for Histologic Evaluation of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Hyperspectral Imaging and K-Means Classification for Histologic Evaluation of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasser Khouj, Jeremy Dawson, James Coad, Linda Vona-Davis

Abstract

Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) is a non-invasive optical imaging modality that shows the potential to aid pathologists in breast cancer diagnoses cases. In this study, breast cancer tissues from different patients were imaged by a hyperspectral system to detect spectral differences between normal and breast cancer tissues. Tissue samples mounted on slides were identified from 10 different patients. Samples from each patient included both normal and ductal carcinoma tissue, both stained with hematoxylin and eosin stain and unstained. Slides were imaged using a snapshot HSI system, and the spectral reflectance differences were evaluated. Analysis of the spectral reflectance values indicated that wavelengths near 550 nm showed the best differentiation between tissue types. This information was used to train image processing algorithms using supervised and unsupervised data. The K-means method was applied to the hyperspectral data cubes, and successfully detected spectral tissue differences with sensitivity of 85.45%, and specificity of 94.64% with true negative rate of 95.8%, and false positive rate of 4.2%. These results were verified by ground-truth marking of the tissue samples by a pathologist. In the hyperspectral image analysis, the image processing algorithm, K-means, shows the greatest potential for building a semi-automated system that could identify and sort between normal and ductal carcinomain situtissues.

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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 26 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 21 27%
Computer Science 9 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 29 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#8,264,793
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#3,073
of 22,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,463
of 446,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#29
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 446,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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.