1,720,976 research outputs found
Introduction - Other encapsulated follicular-patterned thyroid tumours
No full textSome encapsulated follicular-patterned neoplasms of the thyroid pose diagnostic difficulties because of uncertainties whether the nuclear changes are sufficient to justify a diagnosis of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) or because of uncertainties about the presence of capsular or vascular invasion
Tumours of uncertain malignant potential - Other encapsulated follicular-patterned thyroid tumours
No full textTumors of uncertain malignant potential (UMP) are encapsulated or well-circumscribed follicular-patterned thyroid tumors with questionable capsular or vascular invasion, irrespective of presence or absence of papillary carcinoma-type nuclear features
Hürthle (oncocytic) cell tumours
No full textHurthle cell tumours are neoplasms composed of oncocytic cells which are usually encapsulated. If noninvasive they are termed "adenomas" and if showing capsular and/or vascular invasion, carcinoma
Non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features - Other encapsulated follicular-patterned thyroid tumours
No full textNon-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP): a non-invasive neoplasm of thyroid follicular cells with a follicular growth pattern and nuclear features of papillary carcinoma that has an extremely low malignant potential and shares these features with WDT-UM
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe 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
- …
