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 |
Maximum inspiratory pressure as a clinically meaningful trial endpoint for neuromuscular diseases: a comprehensive review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13023-017-0598-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benedikt Schoser, Edward Fong, Tarekegn Geberhiwot, Derralynn Hughes, John T. Kissel, Shyam C. Madathil, David Orlikowski, Michael I. Polkey, Mark Roberts, Harm A. W. M. Tiddens, Peter Young |
| Abstract |
Respiratory muscle strength is a proven predictor of long-term outcome of neuromuscular disease (NMD), including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and spinal muscular atrophy. Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), a sensitive measure of respiratory muscle strength, one of several useful tests of respiratory muscle strength, is gaining interest as a therapeutic clinical trial endpoint for NMD. In this comprehensive review we investigate the use of MIP as a measure of respiratory muscle strength in clinical trials of therapeutics targeting respiratory muscle, examine the correlation of MIP with survival, quality of life, and other measures of pulmonary function, and outline the role of MIP as a clinically significantly meaningful outcome measure. Our analysis supports the utility of MIP for the early evaluation of respiratory muscle strength, especially of the diaphragm, in patients with NMD and as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials of therapies for NMD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 213 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 12% |
| Researcher | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 16% |
| Unknown | 72 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 65 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 8% |
| Unknown | 78 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 04 May 2023.
All research outputs
#6,564,808
of 24,288,533 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#857
of 2,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,251
of 312,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#21
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,288,533 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 312,233 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.