↓ Skip to main content

The predictive value of respiratory function tests for non-invasive ventilation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 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
The predictive value of respiratory function tests for non-invasive ventilation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Published in
Respiratory Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12931-017-0624-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. B. M. Tilanus, J. T. Groothuis, J. M. C. TenBroek-Pastoor, T. B. Feuth, Y. F. Heijdra, J. P. L. Slenders, J. Doorduin, B. G. Van Engelen, M. J. Kampelmacher, J. Raaphorst

Abstract

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) improves survival and quality of life in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients. The timing of referral to a home ventilation service (HVS), which is in part based on respiratory function tests, has shown room for improvement. It is currently unknown which respiratory function test predicts an appropriate timing of the initiation of NIV. We analysed, retrospectively, serial data of five respiratory function tests: forced vital capacity (FVC), peak cough flow (PCF), maximum inspiratory and expiratory pressure (MIP and MEP) and sniff nasal inspiratory pressure (SNIP) in patients with ALS. Patients who had had at least one assessment of respiratory function and one visit at the HVS, were included. Our aim was to detect the test with the highest predictive value for the need for elective NIV in the following 3 months. We analysed time curves, currently used cut-off values for referral, and respiratory function test results between 'NIV indication' and 'no-NIV indication' patients. One hundred ten patients with ALS were included of whom 87 received an NIV indication; 11.5% had one assessment before receiving an NIV indication, 88.5% had two or more assessments. The NIV indication was based on complaints of hypoventilation and/or proven (nocturnal) hypercapnia. The five respiratory function tests showed a descending trend during disease progression, where SNIP showed the greatest decline within the latest 3 months before NIV indication (mean = -22%). PCF at the time of referral to the HVS significantly discriminated between the groups 'NIV-indication' and 'no NIV-indication yet' patients at the first HVS visit: 259 (±92) vs. 348 (±137) L/min, p = 0.019. PCF and SNIP showed the best predictive characteristics in terms of sensitivity. SNIP showed the greatest decline prior to NIV indication and PCF significantly differentiated 'NIV-indication' from 'no NIV-indication yet' patients with ALS. Currently used cut-off values might be adjusted and other respiratory function tests such as SNIP and PCF may become part of routine care in patients with ALS in order to avoid non-timely initiation of (non-invasive) ventilation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 131 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 48 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 12%
Neuroscience 8 6%
Psychology 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 55 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,660,989
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#582
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,303
of 327,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#21
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 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 327,041 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 61% of its contemporaries.