| Title |
Lugano 2014 criteria for assessing FDG-PET/CT in lymphoma: an operational approach for clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s136988 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ronald L Van Heertum, Robert Scarimbolo, John G Wolodzko, Barbara Klencke, Richard Messmann, Feza Tunc, Levi Sokol, Rajan Agarwal, James A Strafaci, Michael O’Neal |
| Abstract |
An operationalized workflow paradigm is presented and validated with pilot subject data. This approach is reproducible with a high concordance rate between individual readers (kappa 0.73 [confidence interval 0.59-0.87; P=<0.0001]) using a 5-point scale to assess [(18)F] labeled fluorodeoxyglucose metabolic activity in lymphomatous lesions. These results suggest an operationally practical 5-point scale workflow paradigm for potential use in larger clinical trials evaluating lymphoma therapeutics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 16% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 21% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 44% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 34 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 August 2022.
All research outputs
#4,326,480
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#267
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,981
of 331,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 331,069 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.