You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in lung cancer screening Computed Tomography scans: independent contribution of emphysema, air trapping and bronchial wall thickening
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Respiratory Research, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1465-9921-14-59 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Onno M Mets, Michael Schmidt, Constantinus F Buckens, Martijn J Gondrie, Ivana Isgum, Matthijs Oudkerk, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart, Harry J de Koning, Carlijn M van der Aalst, Mathias Prokop, Jan-Willem J Lammers, Pieter Zanen, Firdaus A Mohamed Hoesein, Willem PThM Mali, Bram van Ginneken, Eva M van Rikxoort, Pim A de Jong |
| Abstract |
Beyond lung cancer, screening CT contains additional information on other smoking related diseases (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, COPD). Since pulmonary function testing is not regularly incorporated in lung cancer screening, imaging biomarkers for COPD are likely to provide important surrogate measures for disease evaluation. Therefore, this study aims to determine the independent diagnostic value of CT emphysema, CT air trapping and CT bronchial wall thickness for COPD in low-dose screening CT scans. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 114 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 18% |
| Unknown | 32 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 45% |
| Engineering | 7 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Unknown | 37 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 May 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,702
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,758
of 207,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#27
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 207,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.