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 |
Effect of spirometry on intra-thoracic pressures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-018-3217-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicholas B. Tiller, Andrew J. Simpson |
| Abstract |
Due to the high intra-thoracic pressures associated with forced vital capacity manoeuvres, spirometry is contraindicated for vulnerable patients. However, the typical pressure response to spirometry has not been reported. Eight healthy, recreationally-active men performed spirometry while oesophageal pressure was recorded using a latex balloon-tipped catheter. Peak oesophageal pressure during inspiration was - 47 ± 9 cmH2O (37 ± 10% of maximal inspiratory pressure), while peak oesophageal pressure during forced expiration was 102 ± 34 cmH2O (75 ± 17% of maximal expiratory pressure). The deleterious consequences of spirometry might be associated with intra-thoracic pressures that approach maximal values during forced expiration. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#12,946,898
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,532
of 4,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,967
of 439,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#38
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,283 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 63% 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 439,449 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 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 67% of its contemporaries.