| Title |
Can portable tomosynthesis improve the diagnostic value of bedside chest X-ray in the intensive care unit? A proof of concept study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Radiology Experimental, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41747-017-0021-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeroen Cant, Annemie Snoeckx, Gert Behiels, Paul M. Parizel, Jan Sijbers |
| Abstract |
Portable bedside chest X-ray (CXR) is an important and frequently used tool in the intensive care unit (ICU). Unfortunately, the diagnostic value of portable CXR is often low due to technical limitations and suboptimal patient positioning. Additionally, abnormalities in the chest may be hidden on the projection image by overlapping anatomy and devices such as endotracheal tubes, lines and catheters. Digital tomosynthesis (DTS) can solve the problem of anatomical overlap. In DTS, several low-dose X-ray images from different angles are acquired and subsequently used by a reconstruction algorithm to compute section images along planes parallel to the detector. However, a portable device to be used for portable bedside chest DTS is not on the market yet. In this work, we discuss modifications to a portable X-ray device to enable portable DTS and illustrate the potential of portable DTS to improve the diagnostic value of bedside CXR in the ICU. A simulation, based on computed tomography scans, is presented. Our experiments comparing portable DTS with conventional bedside CXR showed a substantially improved detection of pneumothorax and other abnormalities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 7 | 64% |
| Colombia | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 82% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 44% |
| Engineering | 4 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,999,406
of 25,137,221 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology Experimental
#18
of 281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,688
of 334,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology Experimental
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,137,221 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 334,873 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.