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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Are sleep disorders associated with increased mortality in asthma patients?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-016-0313-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kyu-Tae Han, Hong-Chul Bae, Sang Gyu Lee, Seung Ju Kim, Woorim Kim, Hyo Jung Lee, Yeong Jun Ju, Eun-Cheol Park |
| Abstract |
South Korea has experienced problems regarding poor management of symptoms of asthma patients and remarkable increases in sleep disorders. However, few studies have investigated these issues. We examined the relationship between sleep disorders and mortality in asthma patients to suggest effective alternatives from a novel perspective. We used data from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) National Sample Cohort 2004-2013, which included medical claims filed for 186,491 patients who were newly diagnosed with asthma during the study period. We performed survival analyses using a Cox proportional hazards model with time-dependent covariates to examine the relationship between sleep disorders and mortality in asthma patients. There were 5179 (2.78%) patients who died during the study period. Sleep disorders in patients previously diagnosed with asthma were associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.451, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.253-1.681). In addition, significant interaction was found between sleep disorders and Charlson comorbidity index. Our findings suggest that an increased prevalence of sleep disorders in asthma patients increases the risk of mortality. Considering the worsening status of asthma management and the rapid growth of sleep disorders in South Korea, clinicians and health policymakers should work to develop interventions to address these issues. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 42% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 May 2017.
All research outputs
#5,679,639
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#385
of 1,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,624
of 418,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 418,266 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 69% of its contemporaries.