↓ Skip to main content

Mature cystic teratoma of the ovary: a cutting edge overview on imaging features

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
Title
Mature cystic teratoma of the ovary: a cutting edge overview on imaging features
Published in
Insights into Imaging, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13244-016-0539-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hilal Sahin, Samir Abdullazade, Muzaffer Sanci

Abstract

Mature cystic teratoma (MCT) is the most common neoplasm of the ovary and includes at least two well- differentiated germ cell layers. Different combinations of mature tissue derivatives with varying arrangements in the tumour cause a wide spectrum of radiological presentation ranging from a purely cystic mass to a complex cystic mass with a considerable solid component. In different imaging modalities, each radiological feature reflects a specific pathologic equivalent that forms because of diverse compositions of histological components. Understanding uncommon findings as well as the classic signs with basic knowledge of pathological equivalents permits a more accurate diagnosis and guides adequate treatment. In this review, radiological features of MCT in different imaging modalities (US, CT, MR imaging) including specific signs and useful radiological artefacts with brief emphasis on pathological basics are discussed. Teaching points • Ovarian mature cystic teratomas (MCTs) have a wide spectrum of radiological presentation.• Each radiological feature of MCT reflects a specific pathologic equivalent.• Understanding radiological signs with basic knowledge of pathology can permit a more accurate diagnosis.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 125 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Other 10 8%
Student > Master 8 6%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 56 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 57 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,932,613
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#84
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,880
of 424,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 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 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 424,832 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 71% of its contemporaries.