↓ Skip to main content

Is generalization of exhaled CO assessment in primary care helpful for early diagnosis of COPD?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Is generalization of exhaled CO assessment in primary care helpful for early diagnosis of COPD?
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12890-015-0039-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Molinari, Mathieu Abou-Badra, Grégory Marin, Chin-Long Ky, Noemi Amador, Anne Sophie Gamez, Isabelle Vachier, Arnaud Bourdin

Abstract

COPD is largely under-diagnosed and once diagnosed usually at a late stage. Early diagnosis is thoroughly recommended but most attempts failed as the disease is marginally known and screening marginally accepted. It is a rare cause of concern in primary care and spirometry is not very common. Exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) is a 5-seconds easy-to-use device dedicated to monitor cigarette smoke consumption. We aimed to assess whether systematic eCO measurement in primary care is a useful tool to improve acceptance for early COPD diagnosis. This was a two-center randomized controlled trial enrolling 410 patients between March and May, 2013. Whatever was the reason of attendance to the clinic, all adults were proposed to measure eCO during randomly chosen days and outcomes were compared between the two different groups of patients (performing and not performing eCO). Primary outcome was the rates of acceptance for COPD screening. Rate of acceptance for COPD screening was 28% in the eCO group and 26% in the other (P = 0.575). These rates increased to 48 and 51% in smokers (current and former). eCO significantly increased the rate of clinics during which a debate on smoking was initiated (42 vs. 24%, P = 0.001). eCO at 2.5 ppm was the discriminative concentration for identifying active smokers (ROC curve AUC: 0.935). Smoking was the only independent risk factor associated with acceptance for early COPD screening (OR = 364.6 (82.5-901.5) and OR = 78.5 (18.7-330.0) in current and former smokers, respectively) while eCO measurement was not. Early COPD diagnosis is a minor cause of concern in primary care. Systematic eCO assessment failed to improve acceptance for early COPD screening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Psychology 4 10%
Unspecified 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,116,213
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#110
of 1,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,869
of 264,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#4
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,910 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 264,516 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.