↓ Skip to main content

Pulmonary biomarkers in COPD exacerbations: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
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.
Title
Pulmonary biomarkers in COPD exacerbations: a systematic review
Published in
Respiratory Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-14-111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela Koutsokera, Konstantinos Kostikas, Laurent P Nicod, Jean-William Fitting

Abstract

Exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) represent a major burden for patients and health care systems. Innovative sampling techniques have led to the identification of several pulmonary biomarkers. Although some molecules are promising, their usefulness in clinical practice is not yet established. Medline and Highwire databases were used to identify studies evaluating pulmonary sampled biomarkers in ECOPD. We combined 3 terms for ECOPD, 3 for biomarkers and 6 for the sampling method. Seventy-nine studies were considered eligible for inclusion in the review and were analyzed further. Pulmonary biomarkers sampled with non-invasive, semi-invasive and invasive methods were evaluated for their potential to illustrate the disease's clinical course, to correlate to clinical variables and to predict clinical outcomes, ECOPD etiology and response to treatment. According to published data several pulmonary biomarkers assessed in ECOPD have the potential to illustrate the natural history of disease through the modification of their levels. Among the clinically relevant molecules, those that have been studied the most and appear to be promising are spontaneous and induced sputum biomarkers for reflecting clinical severity and symptomatic recovery, as well as for directing towards an etiological diagnosis. Current evidence on the clinical usefulness of exhaled breath condensate and bronchoalveolar lavage biomarkers in ECOPD is limited. In conclusion, pulmonary biomarkers have the potential to provide information on the mechanisms underlying ECOPD, and several correlate with clinical variables and outcomes. However, on the basis of published evidence, no single molecule is adequately validated for wide clinical use. Clinical trials that incorporate biomarkers in decisional algorithms are required.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 86 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 12 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 11 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,448,556
of 21,131,454 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#273
of 2,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,770
of 209,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#8
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,131,454 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 209,648 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.