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 |
Pulmonary interstitial emphysema in fatal asthma: case report and histopathological review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-018-0615-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thais Mauad, Felipe B. P. do Nascimento, Marisa Dolhnikoff, Milena C. M. Picka, Paulo H. N. Saldiva, on behalf of BIAS |
| Abstract |
Mortality related to asthma has decreased worldwide since the introduction of inhaled corticosteroid therapy in the past decades. However, there are still some asthma fatalities identified mainly in populations with less access to regular treatment. Pulmonary interstitial emphysema due to alveolar rupture has been rarely described as a complication of an acute severe asthma attack, and its identification in pathological analysis can be difficult. Previous studies reported the association of pulmonary interstitial emphysema and bronchial ductal gland ectasia in asthma. We present the case of a 42-year- old man that died due to a fatal asthma attack. Postmortem computed tomography revealed the unusual finding of acute Pulmonary Interstitial Emphysema, confirmed by pathological analysis. We reviewed 28 cases of fatal asthma tissue and identified the presence of pulmonary interstitial emphysema in 10% of the cases. Postmortem computed tomography is a useful complimentary diagnostic tool for autopsies. Pulmonary Interstitial Emphysema in acute exacerbations of asthma seems to be more frequent than reported. Alveolar hyperdistension and bronchial duct gland ectasia causing tissue rupture are possible mechanisms involved in the formation of Pulmonary Interstitial Emphysema. The clinical impact of Pulmonary Interstitial Emphysema in asthma is unknown. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 33% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| India | 1 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 46% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,976,980
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#516
of 1,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,783
of 332,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#12
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,950 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 332,278 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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.