186,189 research outputs found

    Validation of statistical shape model based reconstruction of the proximal femur: a morphometric study

    No full text
    Seventeen bones (sixteen cadaveric bones and one plastic bone) were used to validate a method for reconstructing a surface model of the proximal femur from 2D X-ray radiographs and a statistical shape model that was constructed from thirty training surface models. Unlike previously introduced validation studies, where surface-based distance errors were used to evaluate the reconstruction accuracy, here we propose to use errors measured based on clinically relevant morphometric parameters. For this purpose, a program was developed to robustly extract those morphometric parameters from the thirty training surface models (training population), from the seventeen surface models reconstructed from X-ray radiographs, and from the seventeen ground truth surface models obtained either by a CT-scan reconstruction method or by a laser-scan reconstruction method. A statistical analysis was then performed to classify the seventeen test bones into two categories: normal cases and outliers. This classification step depends on the measured parameters of the particular test bone. In case all parameters of a test bone were covered by the training population's parameter ranges, this bone is classified as normal bone, otherwise as outlier bone. Our experimental results showed that statistically there was no significant difference between the morphometric parameters extracted from the reconstructed surface models of the normal cases and those extracted from the reconstructed surface models of the outliers. Therefore, our statistical shape model based reconstruction technique can be used to reconstruct not only the surface model of a normal bone but also that of an outlier bone

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    No full text
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    No full text
    We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis

    Withdrawn by Author

    No full text
    <p>Withdrawn by Author </p&gt
    corecore