↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Radiation dosimetry in digital breast tomosynthesis: Report of AAPM Tomosynthesis Subcommittee Task Group 223

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Radiation dosimetry in digital breast tomosynthesis: Report of AAPM Tomosynthesis Subcommittee Task Group 223
Published in
Medical Physics, August 2014
DOI 10.1118/1.4892600
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ioannis Sechopoulos, John M. Sabol, Johan Berglund, Wesley E. Bolch, Libby Brateman, Emmanuel Christodoulou, Michael Flynn, William Geiser, Mitchell Goodsitt, A. Kyle Jones, Joseph Y. Lo, Andrew D. A. Maidment, Kazuyoshi Nishino, Anita Nosratieh, Baorui Ren, W. Paul Segars, Miriam Von Tiedemann

Abstract

The radiation dose involved in any medical imaging modality that uses ionizing radiation needs to be well understood by the medical physics and clinical community. This is especially true of screening modalities. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has recently been introduced into the clinic and is being used for screening for breast cancer in the general population. Therefore, it is important that the medical physics community have the required information to be able to understand, estimate, and communicate the radiation dose levels involved in breast tomosynthesis imaging. For this purpose, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 223 on Dosimetry in Tomosynthesis Imaging has prepared this report that discusses dosimetry in breast imaging in general, and describes a methodology and provides the data necessary to estimate mean breast glandular dose from a tomosynthesis acquisition. In an effort to maximize familiarity with the procedures and data provided in this Report, the methodology to perform the dose estimation in DBT is based as much as possible on that used in mammography dose estimation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 88 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Other 16 17%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 38 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 29%
Unspecified 14 15%
Engineering 7 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 5 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#7,346,550
of 12,362,639 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#3,393
of 5,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,332
of 207,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#29
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,362,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,413 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 207,235 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.