↓ Skip to main content

Disease progression in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis with mild physiological impairment: analysis from the Australian IPF registry

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Disease progression in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis with mild physiological impairment: analysis from the Australian IPF registry
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12890-018-0575-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen E. Jo, Ian Glaspole, Yuben Moodley, Sally Chapman, Samantha Ellis, Nicole Goh, Peter Hopkins, Greg Keir, Annabelle Mahar, Wendy Cooper, Paul Reynolds, E. Haydn Walters, Christopher Zappala, Christopher Grainge, Heather Allan, Sacha Macansh, Tamera J. Corte

Abstract

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive and fatal fibrosing lung disease of unknown cause. The advent of anti-fibrotic medications known to slow disease progression has revolutionised IPF management in recent years. However, little is known about the natural history of IPF patients with mild physiological impairment. We aimed to assess the natural history of these patients using data from the Australian IPF Registry (AIPFR). Using our cohort of real-world IPF patients, we compared FVC criteria for mild physiological impairment (FVC ≥ 80%) against other proposed criteria: DLco ≥ 55%; CPI ≤40 and GAP stage 1 with regards agreement in classification and relationship with disease outcomes. Within the mild cohort (FVC ≥ 80%), we also explored markers associated with poorer prognosis at 12 months. Of the 416 AIPFR patients (mean age 70.4 years, 70% male), 216 (52%) were classified as 'mild' using FVC ≥ 80%. There was only modest agreement between FVC and DLco (k = 0.30), with better agreement with GAP (k = 0.50) and CPI (k = 0.48). Patients who were mild had longer survival, regardless of how mild physiologic impairment was defined. There was, however, no difference in the annual decline in FVC% predicted between mild and moderate-severe groups (for all proposed criteria). For patients with mild impairment (n = 216, FVC ≥ 80%), the strongest predictor of outcomes at 12 months was oxygen desaturation on a 6 min walk test. IPF patients with mild physiological impairment have better survival than patients with moderate-severe disease. Their overall rate of disease progression however, is comparable, suggesting that they are simply at different points in the natural history of IPF disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 13 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 13 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 22 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#13,903,378
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#812
of 2,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,445
of 443,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#33
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 443,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 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 52% of its contemporaries.