Prospective study comparing hepatic steatosis assessment by magnetic resonance imaging and four ultrasound methods in 105 successive patients

doi:10.3748/wjg.v29.i22.3548

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 29, Issue 22

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Supplementary Materials of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (2868)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-5) series, Tables (1-2) series.

Item

Count

PDF

113

WORD

HTML

1533

Figures (1-5)

309

Tables (1-2)

251

Sum=2254

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

165

Download

449

Sum=614

Jun 14, 2023 (publication date) through Jun 1, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (5)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Prospective Study

World J Gastroenterol. Jun 14, 2023; 29(22): 3548-3560
Published online Jun 14, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i22.3548

Full Size Figure Download Figure

Figure 4 Continuous controlled attenuation parameter area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the diagnosis of steatosis according to SD. PDFF: Proton density fat fraction; AUROC: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

Citation: Collin R, Magnin B, Gaillard C, Nicolas C, Abergel A, Buchard B. Prospective study comparing hepatic steatosis assessment by magnetic resonance imaging and four ultrasound methods in 105 successive patients. World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29(22): 3548-3560
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v29/i22/3548.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v29.i22.3548