↓ Skip to main content

Airways resistance and specific conductance for the diagnosis of obstructive airways diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

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

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Airways resistance and specific conductance for the diagnosis of obstructive airways diseases
Published in
Respiratory Research, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12931-015-0252-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marko Topalovic, Eric Derom, Christian R. Osadnik, Thierry Troosters, Marc Decramer, Wim Janssens, on behalf of the Belgian Pulmonary Function Study Investigators

Abstract

Airway resistance (RAW) and specific airway conductance (sGAW) are measures that reflect the patency of airways. Little is known of the variability of these measures between different lung diseases. This study investigated the contribution of RAW and sGAW to a diagnosis of obstructive airways disease and their role in differentiating asthma from COPD. 976 subjects admitted for the first time to a pulmonary practice in Belgium were included. Clinical diagnoses were based on complete pulmonary function tests and supported by investigations of physicians' discretion. 651 subjects had a final diagnosis of obstructive diseases, 168 had another respiratory disease and 157 subjects had no respiratory disease (healthy controls). RAW and sGAW were significantly different (p < 0.0001) between obstructive and other groups. Abnormal RAW and sGAW were found in 39 % and 18 % of the population, respectively, in which 81 % and 90 % had diagnosed airway obstruction. Multiple regression revealed sGAW to be a significant and independent predictor of an obstructive disorder. To differentiate asthma from COPD, RAW was found to be more relevant and statistically significant. In asthma patients with normal FEV1/FVC ratio, both RAW and sGAW were more specific than sensitive diagnostic tests in differentiating asthma from healthy subjects. RAW and sGAW are significant factors that contribute to the diagnosis and differentiation of obstructive airways diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Other 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Engineering 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 18 29%
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 22 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#1,601
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,329
of 275,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#25
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 275,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.