↓ Skip to main content

Breast DCE-MRI: lesion classification using dynamic and morphological features by means of a multiple classifier system

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology Experimental, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Breast DCE-MRI: lesion classification using dynamic and morphological features by means of a multiple classifier system
Published in
European Radiology Experimental, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41747-017-0007-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberta Fusco, Massimiliano Di Marzo, Carlo Sansone, Mario Sansone, Antonella Petrillo

Abstract

In breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis for lesion detection and classification, radiologists agree that both morphological and dynamic features are important to differentiate benign from malignant lesions. We propose a multiple classifier system (MCS) to classify breast lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) combining morphological features and dynamic information. The proposed MCS combines the results of two classifiers trained with dynamic and morphological features separately. Twenty-six malignant and 22 benign breast lesions, histologically proven, were analysed. The lesions were subdivided into two groups: training set (14 benign and 18 malignant) and testing set (8 benign and 8 malignant). Volumes of interest were extracted both manually and automatically. We initially considered a feature set including 54 morphological features and 98 dynamic features. These were reduced by means of a selection procedure to delete redundant parameters. The performance of each of the two classifiers and of the overall MCS was compared with pathological classification. We obtained an accuracy of 91.7% on the testing set using automatic segmentation and combining the best classifier for morphological features (decision tree) and for dynamic information (Bayesian classifier). With implementation of the MCS, an increase in accuracy of 12.5% and of 31.3% was obtained compared with the accuracy of the Bayesian classifier tested with dynamic features and with that of the decision tree tested with morphological parameters, respectively. An MCS can optimise the accuracy for breast lesion classification combining morphological features and dynamic information.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Engineering 7 21%
Computer Science 6 18%
Psychology 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 February 2019.
All research outputs
#14,630,946
of 25,137,221 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology Experimental
#86
of 281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,023
of 321,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology Experimental
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,137,221 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 321,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.